MOTIONS

2021-06-02 46 1 6 House of Reps 0 1

Wednesday, 2 June 2021

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

MOTIONS 1 MOTIONS Member for Bowman 1 09:31 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Lalor from moving the following motion immediately: That the House (1) notes (a) it has now been two months since the Member for Bowman said he would resign from all parliamentary positions, yet he remains as chair of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training; (b) government MPs, including the Prime Minister and members of that very committee, have voted to keep the Member for Bowman in his role; and (c) the Member for Bowman is not fit to be a member of this parliament and it is about time the Prime Minister did something about that; and (2) therefore calls on the Prime Minister to discharge the Member for Bowman from the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training immediately. The empathy training didn't work for the Prime Minister and it hasn't worked for the member for Bowman— 09:32 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 10000 The question is that the member for Lalor be no further heard.

The House divided. [09:36]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

68 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 64 NOES Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

09:40 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? The member for Moreton. 09:40 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton If the member for Bowman can't learn from his own mistakes— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Moreton will resume his seat. The motion lapses for want of a seconder. MOTIONS 2 MOTIONS Mouse Plague 2 09:40 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes (a) the devastating mouse plague is ravaging farms across four Australian states; (b) the Federal Government has no national response plan for this unfolding disaster; (c) state Agriculture Ministers, some from the Agriculture Minister's own party, have expressed their frustration at the complete lack of action from the Federal Government; and (d) farmers and their rural communities, who have just recovered from drought, need to see action from the Prime Minister and the National Party as a matter of urgency; and (2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to attend the chamber and explain what his Government plans to do to stop the devastating mouse plague before further damage is done. Mr Littleproud interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister for agriculture is warned. Leave not granted. Ms COLLINS HWM I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the member for Franklin from moving the following motion immediately: That the House: (1) notes (a) the devastating mouse plague is ravaging farms across four Australian states; (b) the Federal Government has no national response plan for this unfolding disaster; (c) state Agriculture Ministers, some from the Agriculture Minister's own party, have expressed their frustration at the complete lack of action from the Federal Government; and (d) farmers and their rural communities, who have just recovered from drought, need to see action from the Prime Minister and the National Party as a matter of urgency; and (2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to attend the chamber and explain what his Government plans to do to stop the devastating mouse plague before further damage is done. Farmers across Australia are calling out for action from this federal government. This mouse plague is now across four Australian states— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Franklin will resume her seat. 09:42 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I move: That the Member be no longer heard. Ms Madeleine King interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I remind the member for Brand that standing order 94(a) applies all day. The question is the member for Franklin be no longer heard.

The House divided. [09:47]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

67 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 64 NOES Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Khalil, P King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

09:47 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 09:47 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson I second the motion. This is a plague on your house. Not only will— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Paterson will resume her seat. The Assistant Treasurer has the call. 09:48 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The Assistant Treasurer has moved the member for Paterson be no longer heard.

The House divided. [09:49]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

Question agreed to.

09:50 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the member for Franklin be disagreed to.

The House divided. [09:51]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

Question agreed to.

BILLS 7 BILLS Farm Household Support Amendment (Debt Waiver) Bill 2021 7

Farm Household Support Amendment (Debt Waiver) Bill 2021

First Reading 7 Second Reading 7 09:53 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Australian government is committed to backing our farmers and the Farm Household Allowance (FHA) is a key element of this, ensuring we're looking out for farmers when times get tough. Since the Farm Household Allowance was introduced in 2014, over $621 million in support payments have been made to over 16½ thousand farmers and their partners. The Farm Household Allowance is available to farmers and their partners for a total of 1,460 days (or 4 years) in every 10 years. As conditions have improved, a cohort of farm household allowance recipients no longer require access to this payment and are now able to preserve access to it for use again, if or when conditions deteriorate. Right now, there are more people preserving their farm household allowance allocations than there are new entrants. We have said repeatedly, the story of agriculture is 'just add water'. The government is proud of the resilience of the farming community and their ability to bounce back. When the 2018 independent review of the farm household allowance recommended improvement, we stepped up. Our response has made it easier for farmers to access the payment when needed, and we increased the support available. These changes are having a real impact for our farming families: An application process that previously took upwards of three hours to complete now takes on average 35 minutes. Almost 7,200 people have accessed the $10,000 activity supplement. This has invested around $24 million in advice and training to improve their skills and diversify their businesses. The training is more than cropping and animal handling. Courses approved range from: improving business management, such as training in financial management gaining additional skills to complement farming activities, such as obtaining heavy vehicle licences, welding and pilot certifications improving and diversifying farming activities, such as aquaponics, soil management, cheesemaking, and cultivating native flowers. The farm household allowance story is one of change and improvement. Over 90 per cent of respondents to the farm household allowance exit survey advise that they have finished the program with clear expectations for their future. This is what some of them have said: It has been a lifesaver, providing basic financial household support which has alleviated depression and anxiety. This has been an unbelievable help to improve our viability as a farming business. Receiving the FHA helped us educate our son who will more than likely take over the farm with more education than my husband or I had. Feedback just like this demonstrates why it was so important to remove the confusing policy setting of business income reconciliation (BIR) from 1 July 2020. Farming income is volatile, based on uncertain yields and prices, and unpredictable weather. We asked farmers to make difficult predictions about this income for the year ahead. When farmers, acting in good faith, got this wrong, BIR would make them liable for a debt. The Farm Household Support Amendment (Debt Waiver) Bill 2021 will address historic BIR cases. We will permanently waive repayment of the majority of BIR debts between 1 July 2015 and 30 June 2020. This will give debt relief to up to 5,300 farmers and their partners. The bill will also ensure fairness among recipients by maintaining the 1,460-day limit on payment. Farm household allowance recipients who were recredited days from a previously raised debt will have the option to trade these days back in order to access the waiver. This means that no-one will be able to 'double dip' on their benefit. Importantly, this bill will maintain the integrity of the program. It will not allow debts arising from other sources, such as undeclared wages and rental income, to be waived. Existing reporting obligations and regular compliance activities will therefore be maintained. Though the quantum of the debts to be waived through this bill are modest, this measure will provide breathing space as our farming families recover from the drought, bushfires, floods and global pandemic that they've experienced over the last few years. Waiving these debts will ensure that these families retain every dollar possible to help them recover, build resilience and grow their businesses. Debate adjourned. Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 8

Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021

Second Reading 8 09:59 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne Last night, time didn't allow me to finish my comments about this bill. One thing that is really important in this bill is that there are amendments to schedule 5 of the bill to allow the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund to have an extension of time to administer all of the grants before them. As you can appreciate, COVID disrupted a lot of regulatory and administrative processes in many departments and statutory authorities, and ACMA was not immune to this. It is estimated that there are 83 outstanding grants from this Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund, which is designed to support—exactly as it is titled—regional and very small news outlets. If we followed the current regulations, there would be about 30 of these grant opportunities that couldn't be administered and delivered before the fund would extinguish. So there is an extension of time for one year to allow this fund to be administered. As I said at the outset, there is this huge digital disruption going right through the businesses of the traditional news and media players. As I said yesterday, it's taking no prisoners. Whilst there are quality programs and TV channels with news, drama and children's programs, the businesses that have delivered this for generations are under existential threat from the digital video streaming services and digital platforms that are disrupting. The ones I have mentioned—Google, Facebook, Twitter, Netflix, Stan and all of these similar sorts of digital platforms—are cannibalising the advertising revenue that all of these businesses have relied upon. They are also stealing viewers, because people have a wider choice. But it's really important that we support these small publishers, newspapers and radio stations that are part of the fabric of Australia, both in metro and, most importantly, regional Australia, because there is a different paradigm in regional Australia. Many people aren't part of the digital world. There are many older people in regional Australia who don't get the benefit of all of these digital services. We do want to maintain independent local news and we do want to maintain Australian drama being projected on to free-to-air TV and to video subscription services, but they are being challenged. They are in the battle for their own business's lives. I don't think even Foxtel is immune to the challenges, so the difficult decision to reduce the eligible drama scheme burden of 10 per cent on such businesses was a difficult one. There are other solutions in the latest budget, and I will just check my figures. For the Australian Children's Television Foundation, which has been funding production of Australian children's drama and other children's productions, there is another $11.9 million over four years for grants they can administer to try to make up for this change. There is also an appropriation of $3 million of operational funding for the Australian Children's Television Foundation. And that is on top of the $20 million that was announced in the 2021 budget. So that's a total of $31.9 million for the Australian Children's Television Foundation to fund more children's productions. The other good news in the 2021-22 budget was that Australian Associated Press Newswire will receive $15 million more appropriation out of the Public Interest News Gathering, or PING, program. This appropriation in this latest budget is on top of the $5 million they received in the 2020-21 budget. So there is a yin and a yang, but, as I said, we really want these free-to-air and video subscription services to survive. We want the full suite. So we have had to make these difficult decisions, but we've tried to make it up on the other side of the ledger, because, as I said, they are all under threat from the digital revolution, and the whole suite of measures that we announced well before this budget were to try to get them some negotiating power with these new digital platforms. The other thing that I'm advocating for, most importantly, is that, while these streaming services, so far, have had a leave pass—they can put up in Australia whatever they want—they should have a certain percentage of their streaming platform mandated for eligible Australian drama, including some children's programs. We should be matching what other nations around the world are proposing, because we can get Australian production of real quality stuff that can be shown around the world with our own Australian accent. I've been told, 'Oh, no; video streamers wouldn't want Australian-produced movies because we speak with a funny accent.' Well, hello—that's no excuse. In Europe, in France, their shows either have subtitles or are dubbed over with other languages. We could do that too. So stuff that's produced in Australia for Netflix, Stan, the Disney Channel and all these other streaming services could be sent around the world, equally. It's not unreasonable for us to be asking for what other countries are demanding in Europe and in North America. Everyone should realise that it's important that we have our own production in our own voices of our own stories produced and presented both in our country and around the world. It's good for business. It doesn't cost the taxpayer anything. We should just mandate that, for a certain part of the whole value chain in Australian screen and movie presentations. They would flourish, just by virtue of mandating that this new, giant disruptor of digital video streaming on demand has to play by the same rules as its competitors in video subscription services and free-to-air TV. All have to play by the same rules. With that, we put this bill before the House. I look forward to supporting Australian screen production for both children and adults in the future. 10:08 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley Who are we as Australians if we can't tell our own stories? Who are we as Australians if we don't know our own stories? Who are we as Australians if we don't have an industry of creatives—of screenwriters, playwrights and actors? Who are we if we can't tell own stories? Australian stories matter. I grew up watching Play School and Humphrey B Bear, The Henderson Kids and BMX Bandits, or, when mum and dad didn't notice, sneaking in to watch A Country Practice—seeing Australian faces, hearing Australian voices, watching Australian stories. It would be a tragedy if the generations to come don't get to grow up watching Australian stories and hearing Australian voices. That's why content rules matter. Australian content has an economic impact. It supports small businesses. It supports individuals to pursue their craft. It builds an economic echosphere in Australia around film and TV production. But Australian content rules are more than an economic question. They're actually about the soul of a country and the content of a country and how we depict ourselves, how we know ourselves, how we portray ourselves to the rest of the world. It matters that we have a vibrant and diverse film and television industry in Australia. It matters for how we see ourselves and it matters for how others see us. We don't want a generation of Australian children growing up thinking that everyone speaks with an American accent, or not having any understanding of some of Australia's history because they haven't seen it portrayed on their phones, their iPads or whatever devices they'll be watching in the next 20 or 30 years. That's why Australian content matters. It's an ethical thing, it's a moral thing, it's a cultural thing about making sure that we are protecting and projecting Australian stories, Australian voices and Australian faces. That's why I'm proud to be part of the Labor Party. We are taking a stance to say we won't be party to dismantling screen content rules. As I said, it is those rules that mean that we have an Australian screen industry. It's those rules that mean that we can tell our stories to ourselves and to the world. It's beyond time that this government put forward an actual package of reforms to parliament to deal with the changing nature of film and television, to deal with screening via streaming services and to deal with the difference between free-to-air television and paid television. We need a package of reforms that comprehensively deals with the world we're in, that deals with where we're moving to and that preserves those precious Australian stories. It was 2017 when then Minister Fifield announced a broad-ranging and comprehensive review of Australian and children's content, saying that the review would 'identify sustainable policies to ensure the ongoing availability of Australian and children's content to domestic and international audiences, regardless of platform'. But, in June 2021, there's nothing to modernise Australian content obligations for the contemporary media environment, which now includes video streaming platforms. The problem with this bill is that it proposes to halve Foxtel's Australian screen content obligation without putting anything in its place. There's no requirement, for example, for streaming services like Netflix to produce Australian content. That's what a federal government is for: to put in, in this context, requirements to protect Australian industry and Australian content. We've seen this government water down Australian screen content rules before, when it comes to commercial free-to-air television broadcasters. In September last year the minister announced changes to the drama, documentary and children's content subquota and Australian content rules for broadcasters. Those changes didn't come before the parliament, but were made by the ACMA at the direction of the minister. The same subquotas were suspended in 2020 as an emergency COVID-19 measure and then reintroduced in watered down form from 1 January this year. We on this side said at that time these changes would mean fewer Australian stories on our television screens and fewer job opportunities for local creators. In the context of a government that is talking up job creation as part of the economic recovery, it is incomprehensible that apparently job opportunities for local creators don't matter. In the context of a government that likes to talk all the time about Australian values and standing up for Australia, it is incomprehensible that the government doesn't stand up for Australian content, for those very same Australian values, for that very same country to be portrayed in documentaries, television series, films to our citizens and across the world. There has been a profound failure to 'Make It Australian', to pick up that campaign. There has been a profound failure for the creators and for the small businesses that comprise the screen sector. There has been a profound failure for Australians who want more Australian stories. Just a couple of weeks ago, I received an email from a constituent. I am pretty privileged to represent an electorate which has a range of amazing creative people in it. I have children's authors like Danielle Binks, I have photograph journalists like Vivienne Zink, and I have Chris Gist, who emailed me. He's been involved in film and television for 30 years and commissioned some of Australia's favourite dramas—Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries, Jack Irish, The Doctor Blake Mysteries and more. He's worked in Australia and he's worked internationally. As he said to me in his email, he knows how valuable this kind of media is, both for the national audience and as an unparalleled form of national cultural projection. In fact, he just finished shooting an independent feature film on the Mornington Peninsular starring Nadine Garner. I am still a bit upset I didn't know she was in my neck of the woods so I could go and be a fan girl but I have mentioned that to Chris and we are going to sort that out later. Filming that in the Mornington Peninsula area put a lot of money into the local community as well as creating local content. Chris is concerned, he says to me, that local content is taking yet another knock with federal changes to the relevant legislation. Chris wrote to me, 'Writers and producers, like my wife and I, alongside the broader Australian film and television industry really need your support in stopping the erosion of the content requirements.' He has a number of requests, which I have said to Chris I personally think are eminently sensible: regulation of streaming services—20 per cent of locally sourced revenue should be invested in new Australian content; the retention of the Gallipoli clause to allow feature filmmakers to claim for Aussie story elements shot offshore; and the retention of current expenditure thresholds for feature-length content at $500,000. Chris wrote to me, 'Last September, the Morrison government announced significant changes to local content rules on free-to-air commercial television and introduced a point system that will cause'—and he put the following in bold—'an annual decline in drama production of $100 million. To maintain the growth in Australia's much-loved screen industry, streaming services need to be required to invest in local content. They have phenomenally well during COVID. Netflix and Amazon Prime earn $1.7 to $2 billion annually from Australian subscribers but year after year pay little tax here in Australia. Based on international precedent,' Chris went on to say, 'streaming services should have to invest at least 20 per cent of their locally sourced revenue in producing new Australian content. This will create 10, 000 jobs and stimulate the economic growth that Minister Fletcher aims for. By comparison, the EU's audio visual media directive pegs local European content at 30 per cent and ensures prominence of those works. This of course needs to be new content and not just the low-cost licensing of tired, old titles. 'Of course,' Chris says, and I join with him, 'we welcome the government's recent announcement that the feature film producer offset will be retained at 40 per cent.' And I interrupt Chris's email to pay some tribute to Bryan Brown and other actors and actresses who came to Canberra to lobby so hard for the government to do that. Chris signed off by saying: Thanks, Peta, for looking at this. Your backing of Australian stories and storytellers is essential to ensuring our life on screen isn't lost. #MakeItAustralian So I speak on behalf of Chris and everyone in the industry to say that this government must do more to protect Australian content, and it can start by supporting Labor's amendment to this legislation. The government has cut ABC funding and reduced funding available for the ABC to invest in Australian content. It's watered down Australian content obligations for commercial TV, and now with this bill the government seeks to halve Foxtel's expenditure obligation. I don't know how that sits with also giving Foxtel $30 million to supposedly put women's sport on television, which was a very narrowcast way to try to promote women's sport. It would have been better to put that into the public broadcaster with a requirement that it promote, as it has done for decades, Australian sport. Also, for streaming providers, there remains no obligation at all. It's hard to regulate new industries. It's hard to keep up in legislative form with changes to technology. There is no doubt about that. Market conditions are challenging. There is a regulatory disparity between broadcasters and streaming services. But just because something is hard doesn't mean that you keep kicking the can down the road. If something is hard, you roll up your sleeves and you get stuck into it and do it, particularly when it is something that goes to the core of being Australian and that goes to the core of promoting our voice to ourselves and the world. So I urge this government and the minister to reconsider your position on halving Foxtel's content obligation and, as you go about consulting on future changes, to really listen to the input from the people who work in the industry. Listen to the Chris-es of the world, the independent contractors, the small businesspeople, the actors, the screenwriters, the set producers and the people that work in the industry whose jobs I don't know the titles of. Listen to all of those people who rely on Australian content for their livelihood and who produce Australian content for the cultural wealth of our country. Listen to them, Minister, and act on what they say. 10:23 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I rise to speak in favour of the second reading of the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021. Frankly, many of the issues that we are dealing with here are addressing a legislative framework that dates back at least to the early 1990s. I think to begin with we should just reflect on what the policy arguments were initially for having local content requirements as part of broadcasting licences and what the environment was when the policy debates were happening so many decades ago in this area. Of course, it was well before the internet and it was well before modern streaming services. It was when the government issued broadcasting licences, issued the spectrum, and part of the policy framework was a sensible decision that there should only be a certain number of television stations. There were three commercial stations in most markets—Seven, Nine and Ten—on top of which there were the ABC and SBS. So in most of parts of the country you would have access to five free-to-air networks, three of them being commercial. Obviously a commercial television licence gives you an enormous ability to earn advertising revenue. The view was that, in exchange for the licence and charges related to that, certain requirements and expectations should be put upon those broadcast licensees. That, essentially, has been the case right up until now. We've had requirements, including content requirements and locally produced content requirements. When we're honest about where that content has been produced, yes, it has been produced in Australia, but in Sydney and Melbourne in particular. As a member from Adelaide, not from one of the two major cities, this is a policy position that has benefited two cities in this country virtually exclusively. That has not been mandated—I accept that—it has just been a consolidation of that industry over the last few decades. There was a time in Adelaide when we produced Humphrey B. Bear and Touch of Elegance. Some of the older members might recall some of the channel 9 programming. That was lost to Adelaide decades ago. Channel 10 now doesn't even produce a news bulletin out of Adelaide. It's recorded and broadcast out of Melbourne. So as far as the non-Sydney-and-Melbourne parts of the country getting much benefit from these content rules is concerned, it's virtually non-existent now. I don't have an issue with that, but it's important to acknowledge and respect that the content that's produced under the current requirements is produced almost entirely in two cities, rather than across the country. As someone who has the South Australian Film Corporation in his electorate, I'm a huge supporter of the creative industry sector and content production. I think it should be happening just as much in Adelaide and across the rest of the country as it is in the two major capital cities. Back in the 1990s, in 1992—I think one of the amendments relates to the Broadcasting Act 1992—that was the world that we lived in. It's a very different world now. Previous speakers have talked about how we consume content. In my case, it's quite rare for that to be through broadcast media. I'm sure most people in this building consume streaming services regularly. I think 14 million Australians consume streamed content in every given week across the platforms that we all know, such as Netflix, Stan, YouTube, Amazon et cetera. We've got Apple TV, with access to all of those. Many people probably have accounts across all platforms. It's the common habit now to consume content through those platforms. That is the here and now, in 2021, but we don't make decisions just for the here and now. We in this building have to make decisions for the future. No sensible person could possibly suggest that the trends of the last five or six years around streaming are not going to continue. We've seen in the last 12 months unbelievable take-up of streaming content, thanks to our changed lifestyles because of COVID restrictions et cetera. The technology exists for us to have content on demand and to make our own choices about the content. Those are the circumstances we are in, and the policy environment is that we have to respond to those circumstances. This bill and the government's agenda in this area more broadly have to be taken into account together because we are about encouraging and supporting content creation in Australia. We want to see much more than we've had in the last few decades under the existing regulatory regime. We want to bring a renewed approach to encouraging content on the strongest growth platform, which is online streaming. The streaming platforms don't have any requirements for locally produced content on them. We're not proposing to introduce that. We're proposing to undertake reforms that are going to make the priority of the government's approach to content creation one for all platforms and are going to encourage local production rather than demand it. My concern has been with the way we've mandated locally produced content. In some ways, the decisions are not made to produce great local content. Instead, probably, they are made so as to tick a box and, in some cases, choose the easiest and cheapest way of producing local content so that the requirements of the legislation are met. Instead of focusing on really good, high-quality content that can be not just run on the broadcast channels but also exported around the world, the attitude is 'because we have to meet certain legislative requirements, let's just do it in the quickest and easiest and cheapest way possible'. I want to see the creative sector in our country have a lot more ambition than that. I mentioned that the South Australian Film Corporation is located in my electorate of Sturt. They have just completed production on a film called Mortal Kombat, the largest-budget film ever produced in South Australia at $50 million. That's a feature film that has been now released internationally. It's going very well. Unfortunately, the R rating on it makes it a little difficult to access for some. And it might not be every person's preferred genre, but it's the kind of content that is internationally popular and it's the kind of content that people around the planet want to consume. That was produced in my electorate of Sturt, in the city of Adelaide, to be consumed across the globe. That's the kind of content that we as a government need to focus on encouraging. We know that production subsidies and supports are simply the reality of the industry—giving rebates on in-country expenditure. A few years ago, prior to coming to this House, I was in the G'day USA program in Los Angeles in early 2019—I think it was January—meeting with a number of major film studios there, including Netflix, talking about undertaking production here in Australia, and at every single meeting the same point was made—that we seemed to have quite antiquated laws when it came to the support that was in place for content production and creation in this country, and, in particular, not recognising and allowing for the support that's required for the streaming services, something that we've since fixed and addressed. But, certainly, it was something that was preventing companies like Netflix, Disney, Apple and others from looking closely at undertaking significant production in Australia—because, through a quirk, they weren't eligible for the same production incentives that a feature film was capable of getting access to. The state government in South Australia, equally, run rebate schemes on not just production but post production et cetera. That's been very important in developing the visual effects industry. I've got a great company in my electorate called KOJO. They work on a number of very substantive Hollywood productions. South Australia—and Australia—is very uniquely placed to grow and expand in the creative industries, not just in film and television but also in gaming. We're lucky in the sense that, because of our time zone, you can effectively have operations in Western Europe, North America and Australia and work on a 24-hour cycle. As one team are ending their day, they're handing over to the next team, whose day is just beginning and so on and so forth. In Adelaide and across this country, we've got the ability to partner with North American firms and European firms to have that constant 24-hour development loop, so we've got a unique opportunity to dramatically grow this sector. But that needs to include bringing the way in which we regulate and encourage the sector into the 21st century, into the modern world of online streaming content and people making personal decisions about what they do and don't want to watch, rather than just turning on the television and having to watch whatever is being broadcast at that point. That is the future. Now, I've got confidence in Australian content. There seems to be a suggestion that, if we don't force people to produce Australian content and tell Australian stories, it won't happen. I utterly reject that. That is complete rubbish. Australians are very interested in Australian content and Australian stories. They want Australian reality television. They want Australian drama. They want Australian documentaries. They want Australian comedy. They want to consume local news. Australian content has got an enormous future in Australia, but let's be more ambitious than that. More importantly, it's got a huge opportunity and a future across the planet. Content producers in Australia should be much more ambitious than just satisfying minimum content requirements on Australian television. There needs to be a focus on producing stuff that is going to be of interest around the world. You can produce something now in this country that can go onto a streaming service like Netflix, and anyone who's got an internet connection anywhere in the world can watch it. If we produce good-quality content that's holds an interest for a certain category of people around the world, that's where the growth is going to be. That's where the opportunity in the sector is going to be. At the South Australian Film Corporation, in my electorate, we produce content for the globe, not for a percentage requirement that's legislated by the Australian government as a licensing requirement for a broadcast television station. We're much more ambitious than that. In this parliament, we should be much more ambitious than that. We should have a confidence, rightly, in Australian content being interesting and there being a demand for it in this country and across the world. We should change our mindset and not say, 'Let's have a law that says you have to have a minimum percentage of this and that and tick these boxes in order to get your television licence and earn your advertising revenue.' That's an attitude that might have had some value 30 years ago, but certainly in 2021 that's not the ambition we should have for the creative industry sector. This should be a growth sector. We should have ambitions to be producing Australian content that is consumed across the planet, telling great Australian stories. We should be engaging with a sector that's got great on-screen and off-screen talent, a great workforce that's got a great heritage and history in this country but whose best days and years are to come. That means embracing what the future is. What we're doing here is part of a suite of measures. Our government is understanding where content creation and content consumption are going into the future and therefore understanding what the framework needs to be, through legislation and regulation, for encouraging that sector to achieve its full potential. We must support that sector, and we do support it very strongly, but, instead of supporting it by having a straitjacket on the broadcasting networks of this country, we should be encouraging content creation that can lift its sight well above the horizon of Australia, that can give great Australian content the opportunity and capacity to thrive across the planet, to become a great export industry for this country. That will happen if our mindset shifts to one of being proud of a sector that we know can succeed through consumer choices. We know that content produced and created in this country can have an interest, can be demanded, across the planet. If that becomes the new focus of the creative industries and content production in this country, then we will see a great future for that sector, tens of thousands of jobs created and opportunities for so many companies, businesses, employers and people across that industry to have an excitement about their future. It will also see Australian stories told right around the world. I commend the bill to the House. 10:37 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I rise to speak on the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 and in support of schedule 5 of this bill, which will extend the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund beyond 30 June 2021. We're so fortunate in my electorate of Indi to have a dozen local newspapers that publish on a daily and weekly basis. These papers serve as reliable local news to their readers, and many have done so for more than 100 years. With regional newsrooms around Australia shutting up shop, there is no shortage of high-quality print journalism in my electorate, and I am so fortunate and grateful for that. Take the Border Mail, for example, now under the editorship of Julie Coe. The Border regularly wins nationwide awards and has shone a light on important issues that would otherwise go under the radar of this and other governments. The Border Mail, for example, was instrumental in bringing proper mental health support to the region, through its compassionate and dedicated reporting of the scourge of suicide and self-harm. The Ending the Suicide Silence campaign won the Border Mail Walkley awards and was a great credit to the then editor, Di Thomas, and to her predecessor, Heath Harrison, and all the team at the Border Mail. That campaign, together with the work of the community, resulted in our very own headspace on the border. The Border Mail kept residents informed as the Victorian and New South Wales border closure came down haphazardly overnight in July last year, and they're currently focusing on the many different faces of the housing affordability crisis in our region, making this critical issue impossible for anyone to avoid. It's easy to see how papers like these are invaluable community assets. We should be doing all we can to keep them in business. Without them, we lose a part of ourselves. They tell our stories and they connect our communities in ways that big-city mastheads and broadcasters never could. I was proud to learn that two well-deserving local newspapers in Indi were grant recipients in the 2020 round of the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund. The first recipient was the Alexandra Newspapers. This company prints the Alexandra Standard and the Yea Chronicle mastheads that serve the people of the Murrindindi shire to the south of my electorate. It's headed up by Karen Morrison, manager and director, and editor Anne Richey and is one of the oldest community newspapers still running in Australia. This grant funded seven new computers and screens for staff and spare laptops for working from home. It also funded a revamp of its website, which now hosts news articles, advertising, videos and links from the Facebook page. The team made sure that the grant money went straight back into the local community. The new equipment came from the country tech store in Alexandra, and the web design was done by a local computer guru Caolan O'Connor from Regional Business Toolkit. In the first month after the launch of the new website, the papers saw a 30 per cent increase in traffic. This is a phenomenal outcome, which shows both the quality of the website and the news content produced by these fabulous local newspapers. The Alexandra Standard and Yea Chronicle have served the Murrindindi region for over 150 years, and this grant went some way towards ensuring that the Alexandra Standard and Yea Chronicle stay in our community for years and years to come. But we could be doing more. Back in 2019, the Alexandra Newspapers were successful in getting another grant from the innovation fund to produce large-print editions for their papers. Recognising that newsprint was hard to read for the elderly, they scaled up the paper to make the news more accessible to those with low vision. During COVID lockdowns, Alexandra Newspapers delivered a personal copy each week to each nursing home resident in Kellock Lodge, Darlingford nursing home and Rosebank Hostel in Yea to reduce the risk of contamination. Unfortunately, that funding ran out in March 2021. As model community citizens, though, the Alexandra Newspapers have continued to supply the large-print papers to the nursing homes at no charge, but they can't do it forever and will have to discontinue this service, unfortunately, at the end of June this year. That's just one example of what we could be doing if we not only extended but replenished the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund. I call on the government to do that, and I note that there is an amendment from the member for Greenway to make that happen as well. The second grant recipient from Indi was the Corryong Courier in the Upper Murray, which has been bringing news to the Walwa, Khancoban, Cudgewa and Corryong districts for over 100 years. It's a small but dedicated operation that publishes once a week under the editorship of Mark Collins, and what a fantastic job Mark does. The Corryong Courier were a crucial voice during and after the devastating Black Summer bushfires. They share news and events, recognise community heroes, give local businesses a leg-up with their classifieds and keep tabs on the results of the local footy teams. Telling the story of our bushfire recovery has been so important in this disrupted period of healing, where COVID and border closures kept people apart and made sharing information about what's going on so much harder. The Corryong Courier used its grant funds to upgrade its digital technology and purchase new photographic equipment, which will increase its reach and boost its advertising revenue. The Corryong Courier's website looks just fantastic—get on and have a look—and the Facebook page is going from strength to strength. Supporting small and regional publishers is so important, and I'm glad that the government's Public Interest News Gathering grants gave some of ours a leg-up during the COVID shutdowns at their peak, when advertising revenue all but dried up. The funding supported several local newspapers, including the Wangaratta Chronicle, the Ovens and Murray Advertiser, the Myrtleford Times, The Alpine Observer, The Euroa Gazette and the Mansfield Courier. I was happy to make representations to Minister Fletcher to underscore the need for this funding. Finally, on the topic of regional and small publishers, I want to register my sadness and disappointment about the end of the Nine News Border North East nightly bulletin. This will come to an end on 30 June, leaving only one local TV news bulletin for a region of over a quarter of a million people. For many people, including older Australians, the nightly local TV news is where they find out reliable information about what's happening in their community. It's where they see the faces they recognise, the people they know and the stories that are so important to their daily life. This is a major blow for our rural and regional communities. Many talented staff have already left the broadcaster, and so many of these staff have taken their families with them too. Many of them are young and many of them were excited to be in the roles that they had, but they are sadly lost to us. We need more high-quality journalism and more diverse views and stories, not less, in regional Australia. We have extraordinary stories to tell that not only engage us but engage the entire nation and indeed the global community too with the unique aspects of life in rural and regional Australia. The extension of the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund is good, and I want to see the same approach to supporting regional journalism applied across all mediums. I commend this bill to the House. 10:45 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth I am pleased to be the one who is seconding this amendment by the member for Greenway. This bill, the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill, shows us the Liberal government's vision for Australia. It's a future that has no place for high-quality Australian television. It's a future that has no place for a publicly funded ABC broadcaster. We know they had their federal council here last weekend. It was only a few years ago that their federal council was backing the Young Liberals' drive to destroy the ABC and privatise it. I understand that still stands as policy of the federal Liberal Party council, and we see the grains of that in this legislation in front of us today. The future that is put in this legislation ignores many Australians with disabilities and many regional Australians. Under the Liberal government's vision for the future, Australian screens will be full of American and English television. Australian stories would go untold. We'd have no Blue Heelers, a series that I think is well and truly due for a good-quality Netflix reboot, and I call on Netflix to get onto it and reach out to Channel 7 and see if we can get Blue Heelers back on Australian screens as an Australian produced drama for the 21st century. If we continue down the path that this legislation takes us, there'd be no Secret City, a great piece of Australian drama that tells the story of Canberra—not necessarily a true story of Canberra, but a great story nonetheless—no House Husbands and definitely no Offspring. This legislation continues an attack on Australian television. We've learned a lot during this COVID pandemic, and we've learned that Australians love watching Australian stories with unique Australian voices—from the young, who love Bluey, to the old, who also love Bluey! There is huge demand for high-quality Australian broadcasting. We've seen the benefits that Australian stories have to our economy. More than 230,000 international tourists, according to the government's own estimates, visit or extend their stay in Australia because of viewing Australian television content. That generates $725 million of tourism expenditure. The whole sector of Australian screen content contributes $3.3 billion annually to our economy, employing more than 25,000 Australians. Over the last year we've learned just how much this matters. But we've got a government that seems to be determined, despite the evidence in front of them, to ignore the lessons. We know how important Australian content is for our national identity, the pride that comes with seeing Australian stories told by Australians, but this government seems to think they're low-quality, unprofitable, a waste of time. So we have this bill, the purpose of which is to accelerate the decline of Australian drama, to prepare Australia for a world in which they hear everyone else's stories but not their own. We know the challenges and dangers that have come with the rapid transformation of television, but instead of addressing these issues—the government doesn't mind consulting on them, but—it has chosen to give up on any hard and meaningful reform. Instead of developing policy that extends Australian content across platforms, that deliver Australian stories to where Australians consume them, we've got a government that's giving up. This government sees Australian drama as outdated, as some kind of a regulatory burden and thinks that our Australian artists aren't worth hiring. I find the contradiction of this bizarre. Last year, this government splashed a $1.5 billion Perth City Deal into my electorate, promising to move the Western Australian Academy of Performing Arts from Mount Lawley, in my electorate, into the CBD. This is something that is welcome because we do need more investment in Perth city, and I know the shadow minister for cities, who's sitting next to me, is a passionate advocate for revitalising our cities. But you can't tell students they're going to have this great new facility to learn how to perform in Australian dramas and then say, 'We're also going to cut off the lifeline that enables you to have a job at the end of that study.' They're getting all of the debt burden that comes with these US-style university debts and none of the career opportunity at the other end. That's what this legislation does. In the last few years, the way that Australians consume content has changed dramatically. We can't deny that. The number of Australians paying for online services and streaming services has tripled. Seventy per cent of Australians now subscribe to an on-demand video service. That's the way that most Australians now watch a large amount of what we call telly. Audiences are migrating. They're moving away from TV to online viewing, but the government isn't moving with them. The competition for Australian viewers has never been more intense. This should be good news for producers and for Australian performers—for our writers, actors, directors, camera operators, make-up artists and production assistants. It should mean more opportunity and more jobs. It should mean more Australian content produced than ever before. But this bill is about diminishing content. The first step will be halving Australian drama on subscription television, with a cut of investment from $25 million to $12.5 million, and we know that once this government starts cutting it doesn't stop. More cuts will come. There will be less quality drama and less quality Australian programming. This bill also makes no attempt to put any obligations on online streaming services. We know that this is the future. If we don't have a plan for how to get ahead of it, then we'll continue to see huge declines in Australian jobs and Australian stories. The worst bit is that the government is well and truly aware of all of these problems. The ACCC released a report in 2019 that told them that the digital transformation affecting Australia and the world needed to be acted on. The government had asked for the review because it recognised the problem. It was a world-leading piece of policy work. It said to the government they needed to provide a comprehensive policy framework that brought Australia's media landscape into the 21st century. Instead, we get a bill like this—something that doesn't strengthen Australian broadcasting and instead tries to help accelerate the decline of Australian broadcasting. Sometimes it's all photo-op, no follow-up. The other thing with this government is it's sometimes all consultation, no action. We've definitely seen complaints from media leaders across Australia saying they continue to be consulted by this government and have their views sought but they continue to have the same experience of no meaningful action when it comes to making sure that we are prepared for the digital transformation. When it comes to the digital transformation, the government also has a role in making sure that the publicly owned broadcaster, the ABC, is ready for that transformation. I'm not talking about their plan to privatise it; I'm talking about making sure that we can continue to support it as a treasured part of our public institutions. This bill offers no support for the ABC. It fails to recognise the importance of our public broadcaster. It doesn't reverse any of the cuts to the ABC. The 250 jobs that were cut last year are still gone. Jobs in local news rooms in cities and in the regions—gone. Since 2013, $780 million has been cut from the ABC. That's not a drop in the ocean. The effects of that cut are significant. It affects our ability to define and share the broad diversity of our national identity, and it diminishes services that are essential for many Australians, especially regional Australians. In my home state of Western Australia, as bushfires burnt across the Perth Hills earlier this year, it was the ABC that people relied on to give them emergency broadcast information. In an age of uncertainty, where so much misinformation is spread by everyone from crazy conspiracy theorists on Facebook through to crazy Liberal Party members also on Facebook, it's a concern that we don't have more investment in the ABC, which actually is a fact based organisation. The ABC practises thorough journalism, professional journalism, despite what is said in the attacks on the ABC from the backbench, the Liberal Party of Australia Federal Council and, indeed, the former Attorney-General. The reality is that the ABC and the services it provides save Australian lives. We know that that was the case in the bushfires that affected Perth earlier this year, so the government does have an obligation to save the ABC. It's not just regional Australians that rely on it: 71 per cent of Australians engage with ABC content. But the lack of action to protect the ABC shows that this government really do, somewhere deep in their heart, wish they were privatising the ABC. It's on their policy books. They've tried to do bits and pieces here and there, and I have no doubt they will try again. The government that racked up $1 trillion of debt, with very little reform to show for it, will one day snap back to their debt-and-deficit disaster rhetoric and they will start to talk about how they pay it back. They will look to sell off public assets. I know that, in my home state of Western Australia, the Liberal Party looked to sell off our public electricity network, Western Power, to fix the financial mess that the member for Pearce had left when he was the Treasurer of Western Australia. I have no doubt that this government will look to sell off public assets when they, once again, try to fix their financial mess, a mess that they've created on their watch, and the ABC is not safe from that fire sale. If we lose the ABC as a public broadcaster, it will be lost to the Australian people forever. Regional Australians know the devastation that that would cause. Australians in the city, including those in my electorate of Perth, know it too. We know that television shows from the ABC consistently rank amongst the most watched and that the ABC is treasured for the stories that it tells. Some of these stories feature our cities, as we've seen in the ABC telling the story of people who live in Perth through the brilliant ABC drama The Heights. As I mentioned, the ABC also screens some of the highest-quality children's programming, not just on any of the free-to-air networks in Australia but anywhere in the world. I note that one of the last significant investments in the ABC from any government was the investment in ABC3, or ABC Kids. When I'm not in Canberra, most mornings I wake up to ABC Kids with my three-year-old, Leo. It is a fabulous service that educates the next generation. We need more investments in the ABC, not more cuts. I mentioned before that this bill doesn't place any obligations on streaming services. It provides no answers to what we're doing for streaming services. While Australians love streaming services, I don't think they'd object to having more Australian voices on those streaming services and neither would they object to huge, growing, large-profit-making multinationals doing a little bit more to preserve Australian voices and paying just a small fraction of what they receive from Australians for producing Australian content. Research indicates that some 80 per cent of Australians think that Australia's stories are vital for contributing to national identity and 75 per cent of Australians say they would miss the Australian film and television industry if it ceased to exist. This government says it wants to support Australian artists and produce more Australian programming. But how does it do this? By making less of it. That's the government's logic: the more they pull back, the more there will be. It seems strange, but that's the core of what this government believes in. We know, from the debates they've had in their own party room, that they don't believe in quotas. They are preserving a very, very small quota when it comes to protecting Australian content, but we know that if they had the chance they would abolish quotas entirely. We know that quotas are essential to the sustainability of the sector. The decision to suspend quotas in response to the pandemic has had significant negative impacts. PwC has projected that if quotas were permanently eliminated, as I'm sure many of the government backbenchers would like, children's programs in Australia would cease to be produced and drama would be cut by 90 per cent. Imagine what your television programs would look like, if you cut Australian drama by 90 per cent. You can guarantee Neighbours would go. Home and Away would go. And permanently eliminating children's programs would be a huge mistake that would be started by the passing of this bill in its current form by this government. 11:00 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam The Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 contains a range of measures which touch on broadcasting, amongst other things. The first of the measures would reduce the expenditure required by subscription television broadcasting licensees on new eligible drama expenditure from 10 per cent to five per cent. It will provide for subscription television captioning rules to be made by a legislative instrument. It will remove the requirement that all frequency channels allotted or reserved in a digital radio channel be within the same frequency band. It provides that a regional commercial radio broadcasting licensee does not breach a licensed condition if it is only as a result of the ACMA, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, making a new licence area population determination—an administrative change there. And it is going to extend the time frame for the ACMA to make grants under the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund beyond 30 June 2021. I will constrain most of my comments to those measures—that is, the measures concerning the state of affairs in regional broadcasting, and the support that this place is able to provide to a struggling broadcasting industry. Before I do that, I just want to make some comments about the bill as a whole and the government's lack of vision for where we are going with broadcasting and publishing in this country—their absence of vision. Labor is not going to stand in the way of some minor regulatory changes, that would be ridiculous, but we are not going to support one of the measures in this bill. We won't be supporting a measure that is an attempt to dismantle, bit by bit, the Australian screen content rules without putting anything new in place. We're not going to stand in the way of changes to captioning rules, digital radio channel plans or regional commercial radio licensees or the time frames I mentioned regarding ACMA making grants. That all makes sense. But we are not going to support halving Foxtel's Australian screen content obligations. I've got to say that I am gobsmacked that there are members of the coalition party who are going to do that—absolutely gobsmacked. We see the Prime Minister walk into this place with an Australian flag festooned on his lapel. It takes more than sticking a badge on your jacket to back Australia. Australians want to see Australian content on our screens, in our newspapers and on our radio. We don't want to be an outpost of the cultural imperialism of other countries. We want to be able to have Australians telling Australian stories and have those broadcast through our free-to-air broadcasters. And we want to see that on the subscription channels at well. It is as simple as that. If you are broadcasting in this country, we believe you have an obligation to be telling Australian stories and providing jobs and opportunities for Australian storytellers, Australian journalists and Australian film producers. So we are not going to be a part of an operation which seeks to dismantle those obligations. The only reason we have Screen Australia in this country is because of those obligations. The government were supposed to have been bringing a detailed reform proposal to this parliament for over five years now. But, as with so much that the Morrison government is responsible for, it's all about an announcement, it is all about a review, it is all about sheeting responsibility to some other tier of government or some other sector; it's never about the follow-through, never about doing what they say they are going to do. For example, in May 2017, the then minister, Minister Fifield, who has now left the Senate and left this place, announced a broad-ranging and comprehensive review of Australian and children's content. He said: The review will identify sustainable policies to ensure the ongoing availability of Australian and children's content to domestic and international audiences, regardless of platform. It was a big announcement and something we could all get behind, but there was no follow-through whatsoever. We can actually see the consequence of Australia vacating this territory, because it is not like we vacate the territory and nothing happens. We have seen, for example, where a decision of this government and this government's funding cuts to the ABC, which resulted in the removal of content and the removal of the ABC's international broadcasting capacity to our near neighbours, did not remain unanswered. There are other players in our region who saw this as a perfect opportunity for them to be promoting their cultures, their values, their government and their country into our near region. This is just one example of how the government is all about the cost but never about the value and has absolutely no vision for what we should be doing in respect of cultural services and broadcasting services to project an image of Australia, to project Australian values and to project what Australia stands for not only in our region but also in our own country. Time and time again we see members of the government pile into the ABC. The ABC is actually one of the biggest producers of Australian content and the only producer that has a cross-platform capacity to broadcast throughout the country and, for many of their constituencies, one of the only sources of reliable information. So it is producing Australian content. But they see it almost as being in their duty statement on becoming a coalition MP when they come into this place that they have to pile into the ABC. It is a cultural war at its very, very best and it damages our national capacity to produce cultural content and to project that not only throughout the country but also throughout the world. I want to say something about the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund. This bill will extend the time line for making small grants out of that small fund. Something which many members of this place might find extraordinary is that it remains the case today that the coalition have provided more money in allegedly corrupt payments to the owners of small parcels of land underneath the new Sydney Airport—I'm talking about the Leppington Triangle, which is an area that you know very well, Mr Deputy Speaker, because it is adjacent to your electorate—than they have provided to regional and small publishers in this country. That speaks to the priorities of this government. They put an Australian badge on their jackets but, when it comes to doing what counts, they say one thing and they do the other. So, if they want to put their money where their mouth is, they need to back their rhetoric with some financial support and priorities. We don't oppose the concept of a fund to support regional and small publishers. We think it was misconceived. We all know the history to it. It was set up as a political fix in the other place to get a contentious piece of legislation through. That's what it was all about. Like so much that this government does, it is all about the political fix to get something over the line that lacks merit otherwise and there is no long-term thinking and no long-term plan. That's what we see time and again. They've given more money through alleged corrupt payments than they have to regional and small publishers in this country. That speaks to their priority and it speaks to the inability of the National Party, I've got to say, to be a true voice for regional Australia. If only it was something that pooped in the paddock, they would be out there supporting it but it's not; it's regional and small broadcasters and publishers. I want to talk about my own region. We are well served and have been well served. Proudly independent throughout the Illawarra and the Southern Highlands, we have been well served through regional broadcasters and publishers in our region. We have the Illawarra Mercury, which has a longstanding history of independent journalism and publishing, telling local stories to locals throughout the Illawarra. It does a great job. It once used to occupy two floors of a building. It now has, regrettably—and I pass no judgement on the owners of that publication—a handful of journalists covering the stories of the region. WIN Television, based out of the Illawarra, broadcasting to Australia, is one of the finest regional broadcasters throughout the country. It started as a small operation by an innovative entrepreneur in the shape of Bruce Gordon. WIN—Wollongong and Illawarra Network—established several decades ago is still operating as a force throughout regional Australia, but business model on which these operations were established is now fundamentally challenged and it is not going back. I could add to that. The big sleeper this in all of this is radio. I remember, going back several decades, people saying, 'Radio is dead. Radio has no future.' As the rest of the media network has gone through significant challenge and meltdown, radio has always persisted. Always on in the background, it has been the one media form that has been able to sustain itself throughout these challenges. In the Illawarra, the WIN network owns i98FM and it does a fantastic job of telling local stories and entertaining the local community up in the Southern Highlands. Grant Broadcasters has 2ST, which also broadcasts down the coast. I see the member for Eden-Monaro here with us and the member for Gilmore and they would well know that even out in your electorate over in Macarthur, Deputy Speaker Freelander, Grant Broadcasters, through 2ST, are telling local stories in those regions and they do a good job on a shoestring. Down on the coast, they operate Wave FM, another excellent service, and of course, the ABC telling Australian stories, telling local stories to locals. Whilst the government was piling into the ABC, locals were tuning in to the ABC and our local broadcasters during the recent bushfires and crises because they knew that that was a reliable source of local information. It is only when the chips are down that you realise how much you rely on these local services. My great fear, and what I will say in the last couple of minutes I have available to me, is that the old model upon which publishing was based and the old model around which broadcasting, particularly TV broadcasting, was based are fundamentally challenged. The idea that three or four licensees could have a monopoly on a square box that sits in the corner of your living room and broadcasts out to you and your family for as long as you've switched it on, is fundamentally challenged. Over-the-top streaming services and internet based services are now competing with the traditional broadcasters for their place on your remote control and on that square box. We are not going to unscramble that egg. We are not going back to the old days where three or four broadcasters had a monopoly on that square box; it's not going to happen. So, too, with publishing. Only a decreasing proportion of the population reads a newspaper and a decreasing proportion of the population reads a newspaper as a newspaper. More and more, it is read on an iPad or mobile device in a web based format, not in the traditional published format. It has fundamentally changed. It would be crazy for us to think that that model is going to be re-established somehow; it's not. So what we need to be doing is working with the incumbents, and with emerging operators, to ensure that we have a diversity of voices in free, independent journalism and that the profession of journalism, which we all owe so much to, is preserved. There needs to be a way for the commercial operators to make money out of journalism and Australian stories—that's absolutely critical. I'm concerned that, unless we get this right, we'll have an Australian media landscape which is occupied by the ABC and by other smaller operators which are based purely on a philanthropic model. I don't think that would be healthy and I don't think it would be in the national interest. We need a much more diverse and robust media landscape, and that's what's missing—if I've got a criticism, it's that that's what's missing. It's a huge problem, yet there's no vision and no action in this place to bring forward propositions that are going to deal with it. So I support the second reading amendment moved by the member for Greenway and look forward to further contributions in this debate. 11:16 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara I am pleased to follow the contribution of the member for Whitlam. He, like all members on this side of the House, shares a deep commitment to the creative industries, to Australian talent, to Australian stories, to Australian jobs in the creative industries and to helping secure a future where Australian artists and creatives and stories are secured and promoted and where their government doesn't keep, extraordinarily, at every opportunity, trying to undermine Australian artists and Australian creative workers. This bill, the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021, does have some piecemeal bits in it which the Labor Party is not going to oppose and is going to support, in some instances. But I want to start my contribution on the parts of the bill where, extraordinarily, we see, yet again, a federal government wanting to do its bit to undermine the future prosperity and security of Australian creative industry jobs. It's extraordinary that we have a federal government wanting to reduce the amount of Australian content being produced by Foxtel and other companies. Why would the Australian government want to reduce the amount of drama being produced in Australia? Why would the Australian government want to reduce the numbers of Australian jobs in making what we see on our television screens? Why would the Australian government want to reduce the amount of talent we have and the opportunities for Australian creative workers? It's exceptionally disappointing. These are parts of this bill that we, on this side of the House, will seek to amend and oppose. We stand here today, on the second day of winter in 2021, with my home state of Victoria in lockdown and with concerns rising around the entire country, including in southern parts of New South Wales. We have a pandemic that has been absolutely devastating to a number of different industries, but it's hard to think of an industry that has been as decimated as our creative industries have been. Yet this government is bringing forward a bill into this place that's going to make it even harder to get Australian content produced and Australian stories created in this country. Those measures are the exact opposite of what we should be putting forward in this place. I want to talk a little bit about how we got to this place. It was extraordinary that, during the pandemic, the government decided to leave the majority of people in the creative industries out of the JobKeeper program. It's like they specifically designed the JobKeeper program so as to exclude various groups—and we know that universities, local government and others have been excluded. But it's hard to think of a group that was more hard done by the design of the JobKeeper program than our creative industries. The member for Watson has joined us in the chamber, and he has been a consistent voice for our creative workers. He has joined me on a number of occasions in my electorate to hear from and speak to the incredible artists and supporting workers in our creative industries. Last year they said loud and clear that it shows a complete misunderstanding of the nature of the creative industries that the federal government decided to leave the creative industries off the JobKeeper program. They were basically told, 'You can go and join the unemployment queue.' What does that say about how much we value our creative industries in this country? It says about as much as this schedule in this bill—that the federal government don't want to see these jobs at the end of the pandemic, that they're happy for a reduction in the amount of Australian content and stories being produced. It's the exact opposite of what this place, this House, should be facilitating. If we are not for our culture and our stories, then what are we? If we are not for our creative industries, then what are we? In my electorate of Macnamara, we couldn't be prouder that almost one in 10 workers work in some form of the creative industries. It's one of the biggest employers in my electorate. I can tell you, from speaking to many of the artists and creative workers in my electorate, that they are not doing it for the money. They are doing it because they love it. They are doing it because it's who they are. They are creative people and they love working in the creative industries. But many of them work in two or three jobs. Many of them do supplementary work. Many of them are in casual work. Many of them work in hospitality to supplement their income. It's a hard life working in the creative industries in Australia. So the very least that the government can do is to support these Australian workers, to value them in the same way in which we see the government tip into other industries around the country which have far less employment returns. The government should say clearly and unequivocally, like we do on this side of the House, 'Working in the creative industries in Australia is great work, we value it and we want to see you holding a sustainable profession for as long as you wish to do so.' In my electorate, we have a couple of the major institutions, a couple of great studios. The ABC have their headquarters in Southbank. There is also the HWT building, where I've been many times. We are proud to have big media corporations making their home in Macnamara. But we shouldn't be saying to these companies that reducing the amount of Australian content is acceptable. We should be saying that we want to see more Australian stories, more Australian talent being nurtured and more Australian jobs being created. My electorate—I am talking about places like St Kilda, Elwood, Windsor, Port Melbourne and, especially, Southbank, with the arts precinct there—is creative. Being creative and having creative organisations is part of the identity of my electorate. It is not just part of the economy of my electorate; it is part of the identity of my electorate. The City of Port Phillip is a key partner with many of our local creative organisations. The City of Port Phillip, over a long period of time, has done a really good job of not just supporting the big events—and we have the St Kilda Festival, which is a great thing that I'm looking forward to hopefully once this pandemic is over—but also supporting our smaller artistic and creative organisations. I attended the St Kilda Film Festival a few weeks ago, at the Astor Theatre in St Kilda East. It was a wonderful event. It seems like an eternity ago right now. But the City of Port Phillip have had, in their budget, support for a group of institutions, as part of a three-year funding program. It was exceptionally disappointing—and I have to take this opportunity to say this clearly—to see the City of Port Phillip decide to end their funding agreement for six outstanding local organisations this year as part of their prebudget announcements. It couldn't be a worse time for the City of Port Phillip to be stopping and ceasing support for outstanding local arts and creative organisations. I'm going to read them out: we have the Australian Tapestry Workshop, Phillip Adams BalletLab at Temperance Hall, the Rawcus Theatre Company, Red Stitch Actors Theatre, Theatre Works and the Torch. These six organisations were on an ongoing funding agreement with the City of Port Phillip. They have all been told that the funding was going to cease. There was no consultation done by the council. It was an extremely disappointing outcome. I just want to take this opportunity to thank all of those six organisations who joined me last Friday in a conversation about this current council decision to cease supporting these organisations. I want to also thank the state Minister for Health, Martin Foley, and his team who joined us on that conversation with our six outstanding local artistic organisations. We say clearly to the mayor and to all of the councillors: 'Don't do this. Don't cut funding for our local, small and independent theatre and creative organisations at the this point in time. It's part of our community's identity. It's part of who we are in the City of Port Phillip. It's part of who we are in St Kilda, in Southbank and in Port Melbourne—in all of the places where we are so proud to have all of these incredible local organisations. Don't cut funding to these organisations. We must do better.' These organisations, Minister Foley and I will be fighting these cuts. We will be asking and calling on the council to reverse their decision and to reinstate the funding for a full three years to ensure that at this point these organisations, who absolutely need certainty and who need time to get back on their feet after the devastation of this pandemic, know that they will have the support of their councillors and their council and the financial support in order to get them through this really devastating period of the pandemic. We need all levels of government working together right now to support our creative industries and to support those working in our creative industries. We need all levels of government to be supporting those people who have had an absolutely devastating time of it during the pandemic. I also say right here that Macnamara is synonymous with our creative industries. My electorate proudly hosts some of the most talented and hardworking creative workers in this country. We will, for as long as I'm in this place, work with anyone across any level of government from any political party to help ensure that our creative workers have the support that they need and the support that they deserve. This means that we at a council level are not ceasing funding to these organisations, it means that we at a state level are constantly supporting and finding new ways to support our creative industries, and it means that we at a federal level don't just do announcements with Guy Sebastian and then forget about them during a pandemic; it means that we actually deliver support for our creative industries, it means that we actually deliver on at announcements that are made by the Prime Minister and not forget them, it means that we don't deliberately leave off our creative industries like what they did with the JobKeeper wage subsidy program, and it means that, when looking at quotas and looking at ways in which we can support Australian stories being shared, we can support Australian talent being nurtured and that we can support Australian industries not just growing but surviving this pandemic. We on this side of the House clearly say that what the government has bowled up is not good enough. It's not good enough. I'll finish with this final point: you can't come into this place and talk about the way in which the government has dealt with creative industries without mentioning their constant attacks and cuts on the ABC. Forget some of the more eccentric backbenchers that want to privatise and want to sell off the ABC—they're not even worth engaging with. What I'm interested in is why this minister constantly, year after year, seeks to squeeze the ABC of their budget and squeeze the ABC of their ability to manage the natural increases in costs of operation by basically freezing the amount of money that the government has each year. What that means is that journalists lose their jobs. It means that content doesn't get produced. It means that budgets are tightened so severely that the ABC is constricted and is unable to perform all of its duties. We've already seen programs that have been taken away, including the 7.45 news program. We, on this side of the House, want a federal government that supports our creative industries, not one that does everything it can, bit by bit, to break them. We need to do better. These are Australian jobs. These are Australian workers. These are Australian talent. We must be wholeheartedly and fully supportive of them and not, bit by bit, attack them, just like this federal government does at every opportunity. 11:31 Mr BURKE DYW Watson What sort of government attacks workers in the middle of a pandemic? Because what's in front of us now is nothing more than an attack on people who work in creative industries. Let's not gloss it over. This is not like what we were dealing with when we were arguing they needed to redesign JobKeeper to make sure people who were actors and creatives got access to it. This is not negligence on the government's part. What's in front of us right now is a direct attack to halve the contribution to Australian drama from Foxtel. That's what's in front of us. If you're working in television, if you're working in scripted drama, whether you're an actor, whether you're a scriptwriter, whether you're a producer, whether you hold the camera, whether you're a make-up artist, whether you're one of the many people employed in this area, have a think about the number of attacks that are on from this government right now. First of all, you've got the lack of protection in terms of support during the pandemic itself, and we've canvassed that many times in this chamber. But then you have direct attacks from this government. They chose now to reduce the obligation on free-to-air television for scripted drama. Now! During a pandemic, when people are already out of work, when people are already struggling to make a living, they decide now is a really good time to say to free-to-air TV, 'Oh, you don't have to do as much scripted drama as you used to.' Of all the times!—they wait until an industry is on its knees and then say, 'Oh, now's a good time to attack them.' They do that for free-to-air TV, they do that in cuts to the ABC and then they use the fact that these cuts have been made to say: 'Oh, now Foxtel is at a competitive disadvantage. We need to reduce their obligation.' I've got to say our opposition to this bill is not a criticism of Foxtel in any way, shape or form, because I will say Foxtel has been a good citizen when it comes to Australian drama, for their whole history. Productions like Love My Way, starring Claudia Karvan, Asher Keddie and Dan Wyllie, really show Australians doing the kind of complex long-form drama which the Americans pioneered with shows like The Sopranos and Six Feet Under. The Kettering Incident is an unsettling, brilliant, horror drama set in Tasmania. Wentworth is a gritty Australian drama inside a women's prison, with actors like Pamela Rabe, Danielle Cormack, Susie Porter and, this year, Marta Dusseldorp joining the cast. It's good drama coming from Foxtel. What's the government's response? 'We'll cut it in half.' You think that doesn't mean jobs? You think that doesn't make a difference to all the small businesses that proliferate in this industry? And there's all of this in the context of a change that needed to be made that the government has refused to make, because there is a competitive disadvantage that Foxtel is in at the moment. There is, in fact a competitive disadvantage that free-to-air TV is in as well at the moment, and it's a competitive disadvantage that should have been fixed eight long years ago. It's this: the streaming companies have come through with absolutely no requirement for Australian content—and Australian content is more expensive. We get that. But it will always be so for a very simple reason. We are a population where, predominantly, English is the first language of most of the country. That means that when you produce drama in this country you are competing for stories with all the other English-speaking countries of the world, many of whom have a population base way in excess of ours. So we have a competitive disadvantage when it comes to scripted drama, and quotas are the only way you can make sure that Australian stories will be told. That's why we have quotas. That's why the Foxtel scripted drama rule was put in place. That's why we need to have a system put in place for the streaming services. Every year of inaction makes it harder to do this. Why is it getting harder now? It's because, in the face of complete inaction from the government, some of the free-to-airs have now got their own streaming services. Now they're in both camps, which means there will be a level of resistance that would not have been there eight years ago if action had been taken at the start. But the inaction from this government is the reason we are in this mess now. What's the government's solution to an inequity? What's the government's solution when they say, 'Oh, well, Foxtel is now at a competitive disadvantage to the free-to-airs, where we cut their drama quotas'? The solution is, 'Oh, well, let's keep the race to the bottom going and let's make the cuts apply to Foxtel as well.' When we started with a situation where Foxtel had good obligations and free-to-air had good obligations but there were no obligations for scripted drama on the streaming services, the government's approach, instead of having the guts and the policy and the intellect to do something about raising streaming services' obligations to provide Australian content, was, 'Well, let's just lower everything else.' What's in front of us now? Let's not pretend that this will be the end of the story, because as long as there is no obligation for Australian drama on the streaming services the objective of this government will be to lower and lower and lower the obligations. What we see today will be the beginning of a continued process of taking away obligations on free-to-air TV and taking away obligations on Foxtel, and the outcome will be simple— Mr Fletcher interjecting— Mr BURKE DYW I hear the minister say, 'Oh, that's a small blessing.' I hear the minister refer to the fact that his colleague gets to leave and he's stuck here. It's about time he listened to what is happening in the sector, because in a moment he's going to vote to cut the contribution to Australian drama in half. Do you reckon that doesn't affect half the jobs? Do you reckon that doesn't affect half the businesses? Of course it does. But let's not pretend that the government sort of stumbled into this. This is eyes wide open. This is a deliberate strategy of not caring about Australian stories being told. As I said, we don't criticise Foxtel. Foxtel has been a good player. But there is a way of delivering a fair playing field here. It's to look at the section which has no obligations and put obligations in that area—and to get back to the first principles of it all. Why do we have quotas in the first place? We have them because there is a belief that seeing our stories on screen matters, that Australians should be able to watch stories that are set in their own country, that they should be able to watch stories where the accents and the voices and the language that they hear from the screen are the same as what they hear in their community. Not every one of these productions is going to be commercial without quotas or funding obligations. That's okay, because the alternative is that we end up in a situation where we only judge success in scripted drama by whether it ends up being a big profit-making activity. I don't want us to continue to be in the world that we were in 20 years ago, where you could have a show like The Man From Snowy River but Kirk Douglas had to be one of the main actors in it, where the only way you could tell an Australian story was if you got the foreign buy-in, because then you could legitimise it and turn the thing into a commercial success overseas. If a show only talks to our own people, it is still a story worth telling. Most people here would have watched Secret City, set in this building. It was a partnership with Foxtel. The people who got work from that weren't just the actors on the screen. There was the soundtrack for that show, with music by David Bridie. Some of you would know him from My Friend the Chocolate Cake. He's a serious composer. The work of a whole lot of creatives is delivered by quotas. That's where it comes from. The Devil's Playground, one of the iconic Australian stories, had a complete long-form drama on Foxtel. The actor Simon Burke—not related to me—played the child in the original movie and then played the same character years later in a new Australian story, speaking so directly to a whole lot of the stories of abuse that came out of the royal commission. These stories don't get told because they're automatically commercially viable. They get told because there is a guarantee of investment. There is no way of looking at this bill other than to say that, for one of the good corporate citizens, Foxtel, that obligation gets cut in half. When you move from 10 per cent to five per cent, that's half. There is no other way of looking at this. This is an appalling decision, and it's no wonder they took the word 'arts' out of the name of the department. It's no wonder that for eight years we've been without a cultural policy in Australia. George Brandis—a lot of criticisms of him, but at least he wanted the portfolio. Since then we've had people who just get it because it's lumped in with something else. There's been no commitment to making sure that our stories are told. This bill is part of the race to the bottom. Let's not pretend that what was done to free-to-air TV, under the cover of the pandemic, will be the last thing that this government does with respect to Australian content quotas. As to what they've already done, does that hit scripted drama? You bet it does. And does this hit scripted drama? Yes. It cuts it in half. It cuts in half the obligation on Foxtel, and, all the while, a government that seems very happy to be asleep at the wheel does nothing on streaming services. I want Foxtel to be on a level playing field, and the way to do that is for the streaming services to have an obligation as well. It is a ridiculous situation at the moment. If you use a smart TV and you go through Binge or one of the Foxtel apps, or through Foxtel itself on a cable connection, there is an Australian content obligation, but, if on the same TV you shift your remote control to a different icon, suddenly there's no Australian obligation. The reason that we have quotas is not that we're obsessed with the measure of bandwidth and how something comes to our home, whether it's via Foxtel cable or whether it comes through the sky. We don't care if it comes through an internet connection. It's because we care about our stories going from the screen to whoever is sitting on the lounge. If the government believes that those stories should be cut in half, it should have the guts to explain why. Front the small businesses that rely on these quotas and tell them that you think they should have only half the profit or that only half the company should be there. This government understands jobs in film when it's a Hollywood production. This government understands that you get a whole lot of extra businesses involved if it's a Hollywood story being told on the Gold Coast or at Fox Studios. And we have supported those processes and those policies because of the jobs that they create. But Australian stories create jobs too. How on earth does a government get it into its head that it will put taxpayers' dollars behind the jobs that come from the telling of American stories and, in the same year, during the same pandemic, at the same time the sector's being smashed, decide it's time to cut the obligations for Australian stories being told? Maybe they just like it, when they go to a Hollywood set, that they get photographed with people who are more famous around the globe and that makes a better Instagram pic. I don't know. But, I tell you what, it means nothing to people who want to see their stories being told. It means nothing to people who, when they turn on the television in Australia, want there to be a decent chance of the story being an Australian story. And, please, never come back with some jingoistic pride in the country, when as a government you have made deliberate decisions to cut the telling of Australian stories in half. 11:46 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I would like to thank the members who have contributed to the debate on the Broadcasting Legislation Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021. This bill will make amendments to the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Radiocommunications Act 1992 to reduce regulatory burdens, reform outdated regulations and assist Australia's media industry to keep providing content valued by Australians. The amendments to the drama expenditure obligations on subscription broadcasters and their channel providers are an important part of the government's broader reforms to the regulation of Australian content. Subscription broadcasters have been significantly impacted by digital disruption and the shift of audiences to other, unregulated services. With falling revenues and audiences, it is important to recalibrate the regulatory burden on this sector and create a level playing field in terms of the obligations imposed on traditional and new media. These amendments continue the government's efforts to simplify regulations, provide effective support for the production industry and enable Australians to have access to Australian content across a range of media. The bill will allow future rules for subscription television captioning to be made through the means of a disallowable ministerial instrument. This will facilitate the simplification of an extremely complex and onerous set of rules that currently offer little transparency to consumers about what is being captioned. I am tabling an addendum to the explanatory memorandum to provide further information which addresses the questions raised by the Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills on the proposed subscription TV captioning scheme. The bill proposes to clarify the operation of grandfathering powers under section 43C(4) and section 52 of the Broadcasting Services Act that protect regional radio broadcasters from inadvertently breaching statutory control and local content requirements with respect to the making of new population determinations under section 30 by the Australian Communications and Media Authority. The bill also provides for a five-year sunset arrangement in relation to the operation of these grandfathering powers. This measure will signal to licensees the government's intent to review the state of the media sector to take account of the evolving nature of Australian media markets and the populations they serve when determining the ongoing application of these provisions. The intention of these sunset arrangements under section 43C and section 52 are clarified in the addendum to the explanatory memorandum to the bill. The government anticipates that these grandfathering arrangements will remain as drafted in the absence of significant population changes relating to a section 30 determination. The bill also proposes to make two minor amendments to ensure that the provisions for the broadcasting industry remain current. The first amendment proposed is to remove a redundant requirement for digital radio planning in the Radiocommunications Act. As digital radio is now only provided in one part of the spectrum under one standard there is no need for the requirement to ensure that planning within a licence area is within the same spectrum band. The second proposed amendment is to extend the time frame currently provided to the Australian Communications and Media Authority to administer financial grants. This would enable funding under the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund that may have been delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic to be allocated within the 2021-22 financial year, if required. The amendment will not change the total quantum of funding awarded to grantees under the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund. These five measures demonstrate the government's commitment to reform and to streamline regulation across broadcasting services. I thank members for their contribution to the debate and I comment the bill to the chamber. The SPEAKER 00APG The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Greenway 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 admitted stand part of the question.

The House divided. [11:55]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

68 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 61 NOES Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Khalil, P King, CF Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

11:59 The SPEAKER 00APG The question is this bill be now read a second time.

The House divided. [11:59]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

71 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KJ Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Haines, H Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharkie, RCC Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Steggall, Z Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 58 NOES Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Freelander, MR Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Hayes, CP Hill, JC Husic, EN Jones, SP Kearney, G Khalil, P King, CF Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Perrett, GD Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Thistlethwaite, MJ Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to
Bill read a second time.

Consideration in Detail 26 12:01 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway by leave—I move opposition amendments (1) and (2) together: (1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 2), omit the table item. (2) Schedule 1, page 3 (line 1) to page 6 (line 7), omit the Schedule. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the amendments moved by the member for Greenway be disagreed to.

The House divided. [12:02]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

Question agreed to.
Bill agreed to.

Third Reading 28 12:04 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021 28

Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021

Second Reading 28 12:06 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam As we debate the Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021, it is worth us contemplating what is at stake here: a $3 trillion superannuation system; superannuation set aside for millions of Australians to ensure that they can build a safe and dignified retirement. It is important that that money is managed properly, ensuring that members get the most comfortable retirement possible, taking the greatest possible pressure off them but also off the public purse. The stated aim of the bill is to do exactly that. If you believe the government's announcements, it seeks to improve the performance of super funds through lower costs and more efficient systems. Regrettably, this laudable objective of the bill falls very short on the detail. It has been confounded by politics. If the failures and the faults in this bill are not remedied, it will wreck its stated purpose. We cannot as a parliament let the opportunity pass to deliver better returns for millions of Australian workers who are counting on us. We absolutely have to get this right. It is why Labor has circulated and will be moving at the third reading stage detailed amendments which will improve the operation of this bill. We are determined to get this right. I want to be quite clear to every member of this House and to members of the government: our objective is to save this bill, not to sink it—but that will be on the government's head. If they do not remedy the faults that have been identified right across the political spectrum, by business, by professionals, by lawyers and by eminent Australians, no person of good conscience can vote for the extraordinary measures that are contained within this bill. In a few weeks time Australian workers will receive an additional 0.5 per cent in their superannuation contributions. Although legislated eight years ago and promised before the last election, delivery of this increase has been anything but certain. The government's war on superannuation has raged since the writs were in after the 2019 election results. The budget handed down two weeks ago represented a temporary ceasefire in that war, as the government acknowledged the absolute obvious. It is impossible for them to countenance cutting workers' superannuation when they promised before the last election to do the very opposite. Industry Superannuation Australia has estimated that the July increase will deliver a 30-year-old worker on a median salary an additional $19,000 in retirement. This is a good thing, as workers themselves increasingly understand. Polling conducted by the same organisation shows a sharp rise in the opposition to the government's plans to freeze superannuation contributions, especially among workers approaching retirement. Two-thirds of Australians overall now support an increase in their super contributions to the legislated 12 per cent against just one-third of Australians who support a freeze. It would be refreshing, as government members come and make their contributions to this debate, if they affirmed the promise that they gave at the last election not to cut workers' superannuation and to leave the superannuation guarantee levy in place. That would be a refreshing contribution from government members to this important debate. Unfortunately the Treasurer is not leading by example. Last week he pointedly refused to back the legislated 12 per cent contribution rate as the coalition's forever policy. He's been briefing journalists up and down the gallery—in fact, anybody who will listen, while the recorder is not turned on—that he himself opposed the increase to the SGL but the Prime Minister leant into him and make him do it. Frankly, I don't care why the government arrived at doing the right thing after exhausting every other alternative. The important thing for Australians is that they are getting the superannuation increases that they were promised. That is a good thing. Superannuation has been an Australian success story. We've come a long way in a relatively short period of time. In 1985 just one-third of Australians had occupational superannuation. These were the fortunate few, most of them employed in the Public Service or as well-compensated corporate executives. The average worker, by contrast, was entirely reliant on the age pension in retirement. It was even worse for women. Less than 15 per cent of Australian women had superannuation. It was the Accord, agreed between the Hawke and Keating governments and the ACTU, which changed everything. The final agreements saw a two per cent wage rise for workers, a one per cent tax cut and, importantly, a three per cent superannuation contribution. When the Australian Industrial Relations Commission incorporated the Accord into all awards, the proportion of workers covered by superannuation immediately jumped from 30 per cent to 60 per cent of all Australian workers. Such was the success of that single move that, within five years, Australian workers had amassed over $123 billion in retirement savings. It was the starting of a revolution that has helped pave the way for decades of economic growth and a better life for millions of Australian workers. It also began to crack the nut on one of the nation's greatest economic challenges, and that is the challenge of our ageing population. I say 'challenge', not 'problem', because indeed it has been a great part of the Australian story that we are living longer. But we have to ensure that we also live better. If you go back to the mid-1980s, there were around seven workers for every Australian retiree. Today the number is closer to four workers for every Australian retiree, and we are rapidly approaching one in three. 'Rapidly approaching,' I say, because the immigration restrictions—imposed necessarily as a result of the COVID pandemic—have accelerated that ageing trend. To who the gene of complaint This is not a trend that Australia can afford to ignore. Clearly, without change, we would have seen an economic disaster. The choices were stark: higher taxes or poorer living standards for Australian retirees. Can you imagine how the budget would have looked today if we still had two-thirds of an ageing population entirely reliant on the full pension? Super is improving our retirement system. Last financial year—this is an important point to make—Australia's government funded pension payments were $53 billion, while superannuation benefits were over $100 billion. Put another way, our superannuation system is already contributing more than twice the amount of money in retirement income that the pension system is. It is easy to take for granted the solutions that were put in place a generation ago, but those solutions were never easy. I've talked about our $3 trillion system of superannuation savings. That's an amazing story—$3 trillion making retirement a better thing, making retirement more dignified, making our economy stronger. What many in this place might find extraordinary to know is that the government parties, the coalition parties, have voted against every single dollar of universal superannuation. Not once has a bill come before this House to improve the occupational superannuation of ordinary Australians that has enjoyed the support of government MPs. That is something that all Australians need to remember and so be very suspicious of any proposition that comes to this place with the stated purpose of improving superannuation. They are the mob who have voted against every single dollar of superannuation that has gone into workers' retirement incomes. The Keating government's decision in 1996 to make superannuation compulsory and raise the contribution rate to nine per cent was built upon by the Rudd and Gillard governments to improve that rate to 12 per cent. It's absolutely fundamental to achieving the goal of a dignified retirement. Without the 12 per cent rate, the taxpayer is still on the hook for the pension and for workers who don't have enough to live on in retirement. Today, Australia has the third-largest pool of retirement savings in the world. I'll say that again: Australia has the third-largest pool of retirement savings of any country in the world. That's not bad for an economy that is ranked 13th in the world for overall size. As a share of GDP, our pension-saving system, a privately funded pension-saving system, outranks the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada. This is something we should be celebrating. It's a remarkable achievement that is improving retirement and making us stronger as a nation. Of course, the system is not perfect. We acknowledge there are things that need to be improved. I could identify the gender pay gap as one example. Today, the median superannuation account at retirement for men is approximately $188,000, and for women it is $118,000. Those are median figures, which means there are lots and lots of women who are below even that number. It is a huge gap, unacceptable and something we need to do something about. Superannuation has also played a critical role in helping Australia through the pandemic. It has been at the core of a strong, sustainable recovery. Prior to the pandemic, our $3 trillion pool of national savings helped build airports, roads and bridges, and it kept our economy moving. During the pandemic the long-term patient nature of superannuation investments provided a reliable backstop during a time of extreme uncertainty. Yes, there are also those who benefited from being able to access their super savings to see them and their families through the financial crisis brought on by the pandemic. As the economy climbs its way out of the deepest recession in almost a century, super will be there again to ensure that we build back stronger and more inclusively as a society. It's investing in renewable energy plants, low-emission technologies and the low-cost energy of the future. It's providing capital to build affordable housing and addressing social needs while supporting construction jobs. Right across the economy, it would be difficult to point to a sector, whether it's agriculture, infrastructure, finance, housing, energy generation, ports, roads or transport, where superannuation is not making a significant contribution or doing the heavy lifting. Most importantly, however, it's giving workers confidence that their future is secure and the savings will continue to grow through thick and thin. This is undeniably a good story, but superannuation's critical role in our economic rebuilding is far from certain. There are threats to our world-class system. The bill before the House, in its current form, is one such threat. It's supposed to improve superannuation performance, an objective we support, but sadly this legislation is deeply flawed. Labor and crossbench MPs and senators have foreshadowed significant amendments to what the government has proposed. I don't expect an easy passage for this bill in this place or the other place. Labor alone has identified eight substantial amendments, but for now I'd like to focus on two of the most significant. The first is the stapling provisions in schedule 1, the impact of which if unamended will see three million workers defaulted into an underperforming fund for life. The second is the directions powers in schedule 3, which give the Treasurer the power—an extraordinary power—to cancel an investment that he does not like. This is an extraordinary power for this parliament to given an Australian Treasurer of any stripe. It's never before been done in Australian peace time. It is something that we should be very, very careful and very, very wary of, and something that I call on all members of this House to reject. It's absolutely inconceivable that a member that enters through the doors of this parliament calling themselves a political liberal or a political conservative could vote for a power which gives the Treasurer the power to cancel a private sector investment. I call on all members of the House to read this schedule carefully. That is exactly what this bill does. I find it extraordinary that this got through the coalition party room. I draw your attention to schedule 3 of this bill. It gives the Treasurer the power to cancel a private sector investment. It's not on and it can't stand. Labor supports measures for benchmarking and performance measurement of funds. For too long underperforming funds have delivered subpar returns, thus robbing workers of a better retirement. The Productivity Commission itself has estimated underperforming funds are costing workers more than $3 billion in lost savings each year. It's absolutely critical that we fix this. If it takes a robust and independent performance measurement regime to put a spotlight on underperformance then so be it. Schedule 2 of this bill brings forward an architecture to deliver such a performance-testing regime. We support schedule 2 of this bill. But that's not what we have before us in this bill. Schedule 1 of the bill concerns the stapling of fund members to a single fund for life. Before members opposite interrupt me to say, 'Hang on, wasn't this a recommendation of the Hayne royal commission?' Yes, of course it was, but Commissioner Hayne did not recommend a specific measure for stapling members to a fund. There are at least two ways that we could go about this. We could staple members to their money, which with the assistance of the tax file number and tagging a tax file number to a superannuation fund would ensure that the worker's money would move with them from employer to employer and from one fund to another, addressing the malady that Commissioner Hayne and the Productivity Commission before him identified of unintended multiple accounts. That measure would address that problem, a problem that we acknowledge is a big one. That method has the advantage of ensuring that insurance coverage is appropriate to the workplace and the occupation of the worker. It's important to make this point clear: for many occupations the only life insurance cover they are going to be able to get is the group insurance coverage that is provided through their superannuation fund. Many occupations are otherwise simply uninsurable. If you're a policeperson and you try to get private life insurance, you won't be able to get it. There is no way you will ever be able to get private life insurance at an affordable rate because you're uninsurable. I see the Deputy Speaker perhaps indicating: could that be true? You're effectively uninsurable because of the price of the premium, and police officers are not alone. So the only way certain occupations are able to get life insurance at an affordable rate is through the group insurance that is provided through their superannuation fund. Of course, if you are involved in a superannuation fund which is crafted around the specifics of your occupation or your industry or your calling then the superannuation cover is crafted so that it is appropriate to the risk rating of workers within their industry. A truck driver, for example, is going to have a very different risk rating to somebody who works in an office, a journalist in an office, perhaps, or a clerk in an office, and the insurance product is designed as such. In fact, if you go into the insurance coverage included within a whole range of funds, they have specific inclusions. I was looking at the exclusions included within the retail fund and the hospitality fund. There are specific occupational exclusions. It is not unusual; it is a way of ensuring that the insurance coverage is appropriate to the workers within that industry. If you think about this: if you staple somebody to a fund which has insurance designed for one occupation and they move to another, as we all do, they would be stapled to a fund with inappropriate insurance coverage. A very, very typical example that can be cited is if your first job is in the hospitality or retail sector, that is the fund you are stapled to for life. If you then subsequently get a job in the police force, as a frontline health worker, in the transport industry or in the building industry—as you used to work in, Deputy Speaker Wallace—you will not have insurance coverage; in fact, you will probably be excluded from the life insurance coverage because of the exclusions that exist within the fund that you originally are stapled to. It is a fundamental flaw. Perhaps it didn't occur to the drafters of the bill when they put it together. I will give them a benefit of the doubt and say it is an unintended consequence but it is one must be addressed. The member for Hughes has foreshadowed concerns in this area and may well bring forward amendments to address this particular issue. I want to go to another fundamental problem with the stapling measure. Schedule 2 of this bill establishes the architecture for performance measurement. Labor supports performance measurement; I have said why. The Productivity Commission has shown that the difference between a high and low-performing fund can be as much as $500,000 in lost retirement savings. The government's proposals will mandate that an underperforming fund will be closed to new members and existing members will be notified. There is an obvious deficiency with this plan. What happens to members who don't shift their money? What happens if they don't open their mail, if they are not engaged with their superannuation system and they happen to be in one of those underperforming funds? There are about three million workers who, Treasury estimates, are members of underperforming funds. So this is no small problem—three million people. If stapling comes in from 1 July, three million Australians are stapled to an underperforming fund which the government itself is saying, 'This fund is so lousy that no new employee should be allowed to join it. We are red circling this fund and closing the gate to any new employee because it is such a poor-performing fund.' It beggars belief that after identifying a fund that is so poor that you would then in that same legislation staple an employee to that fund. But that is exactly what schedule 1 of this bill does; it staples employees to an underperforming fund. It is why Labor has a simple but effective amendment that we will be proposing in the third reading debate which will mandate that no employee can be stapled to an underperforming fund. It doesn't address or deal with the problem that the government has identified of needing to manage underperforming funds; in fact, it goes a step further and says, 'Yes, we agree you should manage these underperforming funds but, for God's sake, don't staple a poor, unsuspecting worker to one of them. Okay?' That brings me to schedule 3 of the bill. The legislation introduces a new best financial interest duty for superannuation funds and trustees. This, I have to say, runs contrary to a direct recommendation of Commissioner Hayne in the final report of the banking royal commission. I want to make this quite clear to all members opposite. Commissioner Hayne looked at this proposition—it was squarely put before him: should we introduce a new best financial interest duty? Commissioner Hayne said, 'No, it is not necessary and, what is more, it is likely to create a whole range of costly red tape that is not in the interests of fund members.' He specifically recommended against it. Did the government listen? Regrettably, no. The proposed law goes further, and this is the real sleeper in this legislation. I want all members of the House to listen carefully to this. The proposed law contains an extraordinary power, an unprecedented directions-making power, that makes Josh Frydenberg, the Treasurer of Australia, Australia's superannuation trustee in chief. This power allows him to cancel any investment that he does not like. It's kryptonite for investment certainty. It creates sovereign risk. It's the sort of sovereign risk that is normally associated with a tin-pot dictatorship, not the Australian Commonwealth. It's simply unfathomable that this provision was allowed to pass through the coalition party room. As such, I took the initiative earlier this year. I wrote to each and every member of the coalition party, including yourself, Deputy Speaker Vasta, and I pointed out the problem. I know the way these things work. Often a whole bunch of stuff is coming through a party room. You don't get to read the detail of every bill. I dare say the Treasurer didn't say, 'I want you to vote for this bill because it gives me the power to cancel all private sector investments in superannuation.' I dare say the Treasurer didn't say that. I dare say he didn't point that out to all coalition members, but that's exactly what it does. So I took the initiative of writing to every coalition MP to point out the danger embedded in schedule 3 of this bill. As a result of this, I'm pleased to say that many members of goodwill and good intent are now raising concerns in this place and in the other place. It is absolutely understandable that many members of this place—not members of the Labor Party; members of the crossbench, Independents and even members of the coalition parties—have cottoned on to this issue that a law made in one context can be implemented in another, that a law made in one set of circumstances can be implemented in another and have far-reaching and unforeseen consequences. I support strong biosecurity measures, but I guarantee each and every member in this place didn't expect that, when we passed the biosecurity legislation a few years back, we were going to be cancelling people's passport rights. We would have had a very different debate in this place, and we would have put terms and conditions around the exercise of that power, if that's what we'd thought we were doing. That's just one example. We've seen recent examples of how a power such as this could be used. A few weeks ago, the Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia used a directions power in the northern Australia infrastructure fund to cancel $300 million worth of investments in wind farms and a battery farm in that state. I'm not raising this to make an implied criticism of Minister Pitt. I certainly am not. I might have a different view to his about the value of that investment, but it just goes to show how investment decisions such as this can be politicised. You might get one government that says: 'Well, we don't like wind farms. We're going to direct superannuation funds to disinvest in a particular asset class.' It might be that a particular wind farm over there has attracted a bit of constituent concern and that a member of the government party or a crossbencher is able to get the ear of the Treasurer and say: 'This is causing me grief. If you want my support for another bill, use your directions power to cancel that investment.' Wind forward another couple of years and somebody might say, 'Well, I don't like coal mines. We've got the balance of power and we want you to cancel investment in coal mines because we don't think superannuation funds should be investing in coal mines.' Members in this place have raised different views about investment in different energy classes and different assets and used the pulpit of parliament to express their views and their opinions about everything from renewable energy to certain infrastructure projects to investing in certain corporations, whether it be agriculture or whether it be water infrastructure. So members have used this place to express opinions about the wisdom of funds and others investing in those projects. But before this bill came into parliament, they were just that—opinions. This bill will weaponise those opinions and ensure that, henceforth, rudimentary investment decisions of superannuation funds will be dragged into the political fray. And it's very easy to contemplate how they might be used in future. Say there's an industrial dispute in a business somewhere that a superannuation fund is invested in, and say the Treasurer uses the directions power, or the threat of the directions power, to say to that business: 'Resolve this dispute in this way or that way; otherwise, I'll be issuing a direction to the key investor or the key owner of your business to divest themselves of your business. It'll wreak havoc on the share price of your company.' So you can see how a power like that could be used. These are not fanciful examples. You might say to me: 'Well, you're a Labor shadow minister; wouldn't you love a power such as this, to cancel investment like that or bring a rogue employer to heel?' Perhaps—but, more than that, I'm an Australian, and I believe powers like this should not exist. Therefore, these amendments that we'll be moving should be supported by all good members of this place. 12:36 Mr JOYCE E5D New England Usually, in the parochialism of parliament, it can just become quite tribal, but sometimes you actually do listen to what people say, and I acknowledge—I don't know whether you're the member for Throsby or the member for Whitlam; I'm going to go for Throsby— Mr Stephen Jones interjecting— Mr JOYCE E5D the member for Whitlam— Mr Stephen Jones interjecting— Mr JOYCE E5D Gough-like! I acknowledge what the member for Whitlam said. Obviously, we believe that the intent of our side is always right, but this issue that he brought up, as to schedule 3, is not going without question. Later on, I'll be having a meeting with the minister; I've heard that she wishes to discuss it, to discuss precisely that. I acknowledge, and so do other colleagues, that we have a real problem with the discretion of a third party to determine, on their views, where things should be invested in and where they shouldn't. I note that the member for Hunter is here. I'll give you a classic example. We're pro coal and we believe that coal is one of the vital mechanisms that underpin the wealth of this nation. It might be politically incorrect; it might be despised, I would say, in some areas. But, without it, we would be a much poorer nation. We have a very recent example of banks making so-called value judgements, where the ANZ bank pulled out of financing for Newcastle's port. This is not how it works. I can understand, implicitly, that if someone is investing in something and it's just losing money hand over fist, then of course you've got a duty of stewardship—as you do in corporate law. There's a duty of stewardship, to try to get the best returns for your shareholders. But you don't have a duty of moralising on where you think they should and shouldn't invest. If they have found an investment and it's legal, then that should be where it basically finishes. So, on this issue, it's going to be important—and I'm not declaring which way I would vote, and, with others, I'm not walking into this thing blind. We haven't been asleep at the wheel. We have been going through this and trying to decipher it. We are looking for better comfort to be brought forward by the minister as to why this cannot be exploited. We are very aware of the fact that, when the time comes that we're not the government and someone else is, we can hardly argue against something the other side does when we brought in the laws for them to do it. That's the issue here. And that's why I favour a generic and clinical approach to investments, which is: if an investment is legal and prudent and it makes money, then it is a good investment. But, if you start saying: 'Well, I don't like coal. I don't like gas. I'm not going to support people who do fracking. I don't like the live cattle trade,' and all this, as they inevitably would, because the Greens would put pressure on the Labor Party to do precisely that, then we're in trouble. We're in trouble, so how do we do a workaround on this? Superannuation is so powerful now. I think the member for Whitlam might nod or cross, but I think it's about $3 trillion we now have in it. So $3 trillion gives you immense power. If you start moralising about where that $3 trillion goes, you can have an immense sway on the economy of the nation and you can have an immense detrimental sway on the economy of the nation if you start casting $3 million to political hobby horses by reason of not saying you must invest in the political hobby horse but naturally enough just excluding anything else but the hobby horse to invest in. That is not the efficient flow of funds. An economy must have the efficient flow of funds to their best return for it to prevail. We have only one job in this nation. I'm going to say this ad nauseam, because it's so important: this nation must become as powerful as possible as quickly as possible. That is the No. 1 job. As important as COVID is, it's not the No. 1 job. As fervently as people might hold to every tenet of the climate debate, it is not the No. 1 job. In the changing circumstances of our region and the rising power of China, and we hope it remains a peaceful place—we all hope and pray for that—but, if that is not the case and we are all alone here in the South Pacific, then the only job we have right now is to become as powerful as possible as quickly as possible. To that matter, we must at times show that we have become hardened and, to be honest, a little bit more ruthless, that we put aside other benevolent ideas and focus on the main game. The main game is precisely that and this, until it has an erring towards focusing on another game, focusing on another priority. I know that when I go back to my office, people will be calling me, so I'd best get back to my office. (Quorum formed) 12:45 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith Last week, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority released some data about funds under management in Australian superannuation funds. It was really instructive data about where Australians are investing their retirement savings, and it once again proves that industry super is the sector that Australians trust and are investing in. Since 2018, the net value of assets held in retail superannuation funds has increased by 3.2 per cent, to $645 billion. Over the same period, assets held in industry super funds grew by 30 per cent, to $814 billion. Australians know which sector of the super industry has the better track record and which performs better, and that is of course the industry super funds sector. These funds consistently have lower fees. They have better performance in terms of returns, and their insurance options are much better and more tailored to the industry in which a particular person works. On the other hand, the retail superannuation sector has had its problems, and many of these problems were highlighted in the Hayne royal commission. What gets me about this bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021, is: why would you want to nobble the part of the industry that is performing the best? Why would you want to put further restrictions on the sector of the industry that gets better performance and better returns and has lower fees for Australian workers? But that's exactly what this bill does. That's why Labor is seeking to amend the bill, to ensure that it is a better piece of legislation and that it actually delivers on the objectives of making super better for Australian workers and ensuring that they have higher returns and lower fees. This bill continues an ideological attack that the coalition has been pursuing ever since super was put in place by the Labor Party. Those opposite have never got over the fact that workers and employers, working together cooperatively through industry superannuation funds, do a better job at managing workers' retirement savings than the retail sector. It's something that irks them to their bones, and they've never got over that fact. Every opportunity they get, they try and attack industry superannuation on this ideological bent against workers managing retirement savings funds. Schedule 1 of this bill introduces a system for stapling individual members to a single superannuation account. It applies to anyone who started employment after 1 July this year who has a staple fund and has not chosen a fund through the choice-of-superannuation legislation. This, of course, was a royal commission recommendation. Labor came into negotiations on this issue with an open mind. We were willing to have a look at the issue, and the test that we applied was whether or not workers would be better off. Given what the government has done with this piece of the bill, it's questionable whether someone who is stapled to a fund will be better off, particularly if they're stapled to a badly performing fund, which they have to stick with for the rest of their working career if they don't make a choice to get out of that fund. And let's face it: there are plenty of workers in Australia who don't make active choices about their superannuation. Some of the problems that we have with this bill go to the mere definition of 'stapled fund'. The bill doesn't outline what a stapled fund is. As with a lot of things this government does, it's saying on this: 'We'll put it in the regulation. We won't put in the primary legislation something that's an important change to the workers retirement savings regime.' The regulation at this stage is only an exposure draft. The regulation contains an obscure definition of a stapled fund, how you determine whether or not someone has a stapled fund and tiebreaker requirements when someone has two funds that could be stapled funds and how that is worked out. As I mentioned, it's part of a trend by this government, which the member for Whitlam has outlined many times in this House, of putting important details, particularly in relation to superannuation and financial services, in regulations, outside the parliamentary ambit and the discussions that we undertake in this chamber. The other point about this element of the bill is that it's up to the employer to seek information from the tax commissioner about whether a stapled fund exists for an employee. This also is in the regulations. It's more red tape and more inconvenience for employers. The obligation comes onto employers to consult with the Taxation Office about whether or not someone has a stapled fund. Finding out how you do that is not easy, given that it's not even in the law that we're discussing here today but in an obscure regulation that hasn't been written yet. Yet this government expects us to agree to something like that when that particular detail hasn't been provided to any of the parties yet. The second issue around schedule 1 relates to insurance coverage. This is particularly important for people who work in high-risk professions. What the government is proposing may prevent an industry fund from being the default option for people who work in certain industries, particularly in high-risk industries like the construction industry or the transport industry. The insurance they may be stapled to may not be appropriate for their industry and may not contain some of the protections that workers who ordinarily work in that industry get by being in a superannuation fund that relates to their industry. That's why I mentioned earlier that industry funds do it better, because they have that expertise and because the fund is tailored to the workers who work in that industry, particularly when it comes to insurance. This is a fault in the bill that the government has no solution for. Schedule 2 of the bill will require APRA to conduct an annual performance test for MySuper products and trustee directed products against benchmarks determined—you guessed it!—by the regulations. If the product fails the performance test, a trustee is required to give notice to beneficiaries that it has failed the test. Again, these are more obligations on trustees that will be passed through in costs to the employees. If a fund fails the test over two consecutive years than that fund is prohibited from accepting new beneficiaries into that product. Again, the details about this are in the regulations, including the circumstances in which APRA has a discretion to depart from the assumptions about comparisons between actual returns and benchmark returns. There is little detail about that. You could drive a truck through it, but no detail about has been provided by the government. There is also the issue of a potential penalty in respect of investments—an Australian-investment penalty, as the member for Whitlam put it—where the government's proposed benchmarks for its performance measures may actively penalise funds for investing in unlisted Australian assets such as venture capital, private equity or infrastructure assets. So there are problems with schedule 2 of this bill in relation to the performance of particular funds and their investment. Again, there is very little detail in the bill; it's all in the regulations. Schedule 3 introduces a requirement for super fund trustees to act in the best financial interests of their members. This is the schedule which the member for New England, who spoke before me, mentioned he has some issues with. The member for New England gave a very balanced and reasonable speech about the problems with this bill and what it does. It's actively forcing trustees into situations where they may be investing—may be forced to invest—in products that aren't in the best interests of their members. It purports to introduce a requirement that super fund trustees must act in the 'best financial interests' of members. Trustees, we already know, have an obligation to act in the best interests of their members. And guess what? Generally, overwhelmingly, industry funds do a better job of that than the retail funds. It's quite often the retail funds that we see getting into trouble for breaching this duty—we saw all the evidence that was given in the royal commission about that—rather than the industry funds. Yet this particular schedule of the bill is aimed squarely at the industry funds. Why? It goes back to what I said earlier: their ideological bent against workers managing their own money and their retirement savings. The mob on that side don't like that. They don't like it. This extends that duty again—guess what?—by regulation. It comes through in regulation, and that regulation allows the Treasurer to determine that a particular type of payment is not in the best financial interests of the members of the fund. This is unbelievable. This is really extraordinary, and it sets a very, very dangerous precedent for this parliament to be reaching into the boardrooms of Australia and telling those trustees of superannuation funds—if you extrapolate that out, they can do it in other areas like the boards of companies—where they should be investing the members' funds. That is extraordinary, and that is coming from a Liberal-National government: politicians determining how businesses should be run and, worse still, what the businesses can and can't invest in. It is rather extraordinary for this parliament to be looking into that, but that's exactly what this bill does. Imagine that applied to companies more generally. Rightfully, there would be an uproar. Yet this government expects the workers of Australia, through the trustees of their superannuation funds, to cop this. It's simply not justified. As I mentioned earlier, industry funds on the whole perform better than retail funds. The proof is in the growth of those funds under management in industry superannuation funds over recent years. So to direct a superannuation fund to invest in a certain area—in a preferred business that fits the ideological ideal views of the coalition—is, when it comes to superannuation, a new low. And it sets an awful precedent for government to be looking into this. The other element of this section of this particular bill is the reverse onus of proof. Schedule 3 applies a reverse onus of proof, requiring the trustees to prove that they're acting in the best financial interests of their members. This provision was opposed by the Law Council, and is more commonly found in terrorism legislation—not in this sort of financial services legislation. It will create a huge administrative burden for industry funds, and the costs of that burden are likely to be passed on to members, not only for industry funds but for retail funds as well. They'll pass those costs onto members. Retail funds have, on the whole, extraordinarily high fees as it is, and this is another cost that's going to be passed onto those members. The final point to make about all of this is that these provisions are due to come into force on 1 July 2021. So employers have literally about six weeks, if this bill is passed, to get it into place and to undertake all of these new tests and changes. When you talk about administrative burden, so much for reducing red tape, which this government claims it's all about. This is a massive red-tape burden that they're imposing on the employers of Australia, every single one of them, from 1 July this year. And guess what? When you try to find out what those obligations are and where the details are, you won't find those in the bill. No, those details are not in the bill. Then you go to the regulations. They're only exposure drafts at this stage, so they're not written either. They're not finalised and they have these obscure definitions that are quite complicated and quite difficult to understand. Yet the government is going to foist this on employers on 1 July this year. It doesn't make sense. It's not practical. It is not living in the real world, and if the government were to be sensible and reasonable about this, they would accept Labor's very reasonable amendments that make this bill workable. 13:00 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I rise in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021. Australia, like most developed countries around the world, has an ageing population. It's never, ever been more important than it is today to ensure that we have a system which will adequately support Australians in their retirement in the decades to come. The good news is that, on the Melbourne Mercer Global Pension Index, Australia is ranked as having the third-best retirement system in the world. As it stands, the system is pretty good, but it could always be better. The world has changed in the past 30 years—I don't need to tell you that, Mr Deputy Speaker. Today, the average Australian employee changes jobs 12 times throughout their career. In fact, a couple of weeks ago I was telling the chamber about my dear old dad, who became an apprentice mechanic at the age of 14 and he's still a mechanic at the age of 87. In his day, when you went into a line of work, there you stayed. But today we anticipate that employees will change their job 12 times over the course of their working lives. With each job change comes the need to designate a super fund for the new employer to be able to contribute to that fund. Indeed, thanks to the reforms of this government, more Australians than ever before are able to exercise that choice. Unfortunately, all too many do not nominate their existing fund when changing employers. There are as many as 10 million unnecessary duplicate accounts, making up a third of the entire superannuation system in this country. Every additional account introduces another set of fees, which can be as high as two per cent, costing hundreds of dollars a year at a minimum. Just as damaging, the default funds provided by many employers are far from the highest performing and workers' hard earned money, which ends up in these lower-performing default funds, is not delivering the returns that Australians deserve. This bill will go a long way to solving this challenge and delivering billions in additional super savings to Australians over the decades to come. Schedule 1 of the bill provides that, where a new employee does not nominate a super fund, the employer will be required to contact the ATO to ascertain what the employee's existing fund is. Those on the other side of the House might call that red tape. We call it sensible regulation, and I'll tell you why. The new employers will then have to make their contributions to the fund that the ATO advise them about. This will prevent millions of Australian employees from accidentally racking up multiple new accounts and it will save each of them hundreds of dollars a year in fees. This is sensible reform, but unfortunately not all super funds are equal—you know that, I know that. In 2020 the best-performing funds, including UniSuper and AustralianSuper, delivered five-year returns of between seven per cent and nine per cent. The worst-performing funds, like AMP and Zurich, delivered returns of between zero and two per cent. In fact, investors in AMP's Capital Dynamic Markets balanced fund actually lost money. At the end of their career an Australian worker in the worst-performing funds will be hundreds of thousands of dollars worse off in retirement than the same worker in the highest-performing fund, despite saving exactly the same money. We need healthy competition among super funds to drive down fees and to incentivise maximum return on investment. This is not rocket science. However, at present, unfortunately many Australians end up simply accepting the default fund of their first employer and they never change it. Currently, there are as many as three million accounts in these under-performing funds, totalling as much as $100 billion of Australians' savings. We must do more to ensure that Australians have every opportunity to escape poorly-performing funds and that fewer ever enter funds that are consistently letting down members. This bill achieves both of these ends by mandating that APRA will conduct an annual performance test of superannuation products to set an objective benchmark for what constitutes an unacceptably poor return for a fund. Funds that fail to perform against this objective benchmark will be required to formally notify the workers whose funds they manage that the fund has done so, and they will have to do that within 28 days. This will ensure that workers will not be able so easily to miss the understanding that they could be going better and getting a better bang for their buck elsewhere. It will no doubt inspire many to overcome what is a problem of inertia and look into the possibility of switching to a better-performing fund. To further protect new customers from unknowingly defaulting into a severely underperforming fund, the bill provides that funds which fail to meet the objective performance standard laid out by APRA two years in a row will be prohibited from accepting new members into the scheme until their management and performance have improved. In short, this bill will ensure that super funds can no longer rely on the inertia and low involvement of their beneficiaries to prop them up when they are consistently letting Australians down. In total, its provisions will leave Australians $14 billion better off over the next 10 years. Finally, schedule 3 of the bill will clarify trustees' obligations and make sure that they are doing the right thing. Despite the noise created by members opposite, the bill will, in truth, simply ensure that trustees have an obligation to act specifically in the financial interests of members rather than any other interests—what we call fiduciary obligations. As recommended by the Productivity Commission, it tightens up record keeping and transparency obligations and ensures that APRA can make additional regulations where it's necessary to hold trusties to account. While we're improving the financial performance of super funds and ensuring that workers have more and better choices, schedule 3 of this bill will help stamp out some of the poor management practices uncovered by the financial services royal commission. The implications of this bill could not be more wideranging. Almost all of us have a superannuation account. The super pool of $3 trillion is by far and away the greatest investor in this country. In fact, it is one of the greatest systems and most capitalised systems in the world. That is pretty good for a country of 25 million people. More effectively run super funds making better investments means more efficient use of the capital available to us and it means a better-functioning economy. More effective super funds investment means stronger economic growth and it means more jobs today. It means a more comfortable retirement for Australians in the decades to come. These reforms, while subtle, are a critical part of building the Australia that we want to see as we recover from this COVID-19 pandemic. I commend the bill to the House. 13:10 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner A sea monkey isn't a monkey. A shooting star isn't a star. A koala bear isn't a bear. A firefly isn't a fly. A strawberry isn't a berry. A jellyfish isn't made of jelly. And the modern Liberal Party certainly isn't liberal. If you needed any more proof that the modern Liberal Party has become the illiberal party in Australia, look at this bill before the House, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021, which gives the Treasurer the power to unilaterally cancel investments. As the member for New England, Barnaby Joyce, has just pointed out, this is a measure that could cut directly to the heart of the market system, by giving the Treasurer Chavez-like powers to cancel any investment he doesn't like. It has been called a measure that would 'do more harm than good' and 'create new compliance burdens that would add new costs and risks and would divert management and board attention'. It would represent 'arbitrary powers granted to the Treasurer of the day' that 'would set a dangerous precedent and would add a new and unpredictable source of sovereign risk to the investment process'. Which union leader or Labor member said that? It turns out to have been Innes Willox, the head of the Australian Industry Group, who also said that, if there had been a regulatory impact statement for this bill, then it would not have survived. The fact is, the member for New England was right: this is a power which the government intends to be used so it can knock off decisions by superannuation funds that take into account climate risk or the gender composition of boards or risky industrial relations practices that might have some short-term gain but a long-term cost. However, once granted, that power could easily be used by a Treasurer of a different persuasion to cancel the kinds of investments that those opposite would hold dear. As the member for New England has pointed out, there is nothing in this bill that would prevent a future Treasurer from cancelling a coal investment just because they didn't like coal. This bill has been a long time coming. I went back into the archives to look at some of the argy-bargy around this issue. In March 2019 we had AustralianSuper speaking to BHP about whether their work practices ultimately might cause problems for the bottom line. In response to former Australian Industry Group head Heather Ridout's intervention on behalf of AustralianSuper, we had the Statler and Waldorf of attacks on superannuation—the members for Goldstein and Mackellar—come out and put in the media shockingly personal attacks on Ms Ridout. The member for Mackellar described her comments as being 'shockingly partisan'. The member for Goldstein said, 'She's either an apologist for union strangling of industry, or completely captured and foolish.' But the view that you need to look at corporate practice in order to ensure long-term sustainability was backed up by none other than former ANZ chair David Gonski, who said, in reference to the problems that led to the banking royal commission: There is absolutely no doubt—and we weren't alone in this—in thinking from time to time short term and finding things to fix quickly.. but we didn't think through in the longer term. Mr Gonski defended the approach of AustralianSuper as an investor, saying that 'every single shareholder is entitled to have their view and put it to us'. That sort of long-term thinking is part of where smart investors are at—considering social, environmental, longer-term governance considerations. If you are a company whose profits are based on the fact that you are channelling profits through a tax haven then that is a real risk to the long-term stability of your investments. Investors are right to look at whether those tax practices are putting their investments at risk. Likewise, if you have an investment which is failing to take into account climate risk, as large Australian companies that are well managed now do, superannuation funds might then consider your practices. There is nothing wrong with those superannuation funds taking a broad view. This bill contains a political override power which should chill members of the coalition. The member for Whitlam, who has been championing this issue for months now, has written to all members of the coalition, pointing out this risk, just in case they missed it when it went through their party room. We know that crossbenchers are concerned and the National Party is concerned, as we have just heard today from the member for New England. This is a measure which is fundamentally illiberal. The bill starts from the principle that we need to reduce total fees in the superannuation sector. I agree entirely with that. The Grattan Institute's report on superannuation fees noted that Australians pay some $30 billion in superannuation fees. That was a 2018 figure, so today's number is surely higher. That amount was then two per cent of GDP. The Grattan Institute pointed out that a household nearing retirement would be paying average superannuation fees of $3,700 a year. The Grattan Institute pointed out that the amount the Australians spend on superannuation fees is more than they spend on energy, which accounted then for $23 billion. They noted that there are a range of duplicate accounts. One-third of all superannuation fund accounts, about 10 million of them, are unintended multiple accounts. They pointed out, too, that there are almost five million super accounts in high-fee funds costing $1.3 billion a year more than low-fee funds. The Productivity Commission's analysis put the difference between choosing a high-fee fund and a low-performing fund at $635,000 for a typical full-time worker in retirement. So that is a massive cost for workers in high-fee funds. High-fee funds are over-represented in the for-profit sector, which stands to reason. If someone has to take a profit margin out of your investment, it is more likely that you will end up with higher fees and lower returns than if you are in a not-for-profit account. That is not to say that all not-for-profit superannuation funds deliver high returns for their members. Some are clearly too small to get economies of scale and will need to merge in order to do the best for their members. As Deputy Chair of the House Economics Committee, I have been working hard to ensure that we hold the feet to the fire of those superannuation funds who are not doing the right thing by their members. The APRA heat map has been important in this because it gives us the ability to directly say to underperforming super funds, 'Well, why are we seeing so much red in this map here when we look at the performance of your funds?' That is all to the good. But the problem with this bill is that it fails to deliver on the promise of reducing duplicate accounts and reducing superannuation fees. The approach being taken to stapling means that members can be locked into underperforming funds. Treasury's estimate is that up to three million Australians will be stapled to underperforming funds from the first day of the bill's effect. This is a measure which could effectively lock Australians into funds which deliver $635,000 less in retirement. That means a lower standard of living in retirement for those Australians and a higher reliance on the age pension, meaning that the rest of us taxpayers will end up having to pay more to support those people in retirement. There is a reverse onus of proof, which was criticised by Labor senators when this bill was referred to a Senate inquiry and has been opposed by the Law Council. Such reverse onuses of proof are more commonly found in terrorism-related pieces of legislation than in a bill relating to superannuation. The performance measures proposed don't extend to all choice products and will initially cover only MySuper products, which means approximately a third of all assets managed by APRA-regulated funds will be excluded from the performance mechanism in their entirety. This is a bill which Labor cannot support in its unamended form. It's a bill which has flowed from the coalition's ideological dislike of superannuation. When universal superannuation was first legislated there were many on the other side of the House that attacked it. I think of former member for Mackellar Bronwyn Bishop—she was then in the Senate—who told a story about how there had already been small businesses forced to close because they had to pay the cost of universal superannuation, prompting the late senator Peter Cook to interject that it was a bit strange that those businesses were closing given that the universal superannuation law hadn't yet come into effect. The fact is that, after we introduced universal superannuation, workers saw strong wage growth, and the pause on increasing the superannuation contribution has not been associated with a surge in wage growth. Indeed, the coalition have presided over the worst wage growth in history and have just brought down a budget which sees real wages go backwards. So, if there's anybody who has no right to talk about wages, it is the coalition. The fact is workers need that high level of superannuation contribution. Those opposite campaigned hard to stop the increase to universal superannuation. I know the member for Goldstein strongly opposes the increase to universal superannuation. He believes, like so many on that side of the House, that 15 per cent is okay for them but that the workers shouldn't get 10 per cent. That is a position that Senator Bragg takes. Of course it's not always a position that Senator Bragg has taken— Honourable members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! The member for Fenner is in order. Dr LEIGH BU8 Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Of course it's not a position that Senator Bragg has always taken. Senator Bragg once argued that we needed to increase universal superannuation contributions as quickly as possible, but he has now changed his tune and joined with those on the other side of the House who want to keep the universal superannuation contribution for workers low but who themselves enjoy the benefit of 15 per cent superannuation. That holds true with the Prime Minister, whose 15 per cent superannuation contribution ends up being higher than the salary for many regular workers. The fact is that Australia's pool of superannuation has meant that we have greater stability in the economy. I'll finish where I started. When I was studying in the United States in 2000, we saw the election of President George W Bush, and the Republicans at that time were campaigning hard for private social security accounts. As an Australian, it took me a bit of time to get my head around this—that the Democrats were opposing private accounts and the Republicans were supporting them. But here we have the strange situation where it was a party of the Left that introduced universal private accounts and that saw the benefits for workers in getting those strong share market and property gains and those strong gains in the value of infrastructure assets. Yet, it's a party of the Right that is trying to white-ant superannuation and that attacks superannuation at every possible turn, whether it's attacking ISA or attacking proxy advisers, who do nothing more than provide independent advice to superannuation funds and, indeed, to other share market investors. Those opposite won't stop at any turn to attack our effective superannuation policy, which has ensured that our pension is more sustainable than almost any in the world and will deliver dignity in retirement to millions of Australians. 13:25 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's a privilege to be able to speak on this bill and make some cursory remarks before the 90-second statements. I begin by saying that there are a number of sections in this bill that I support in principle, but I am concerned about how it will play out in practice. I have deep support for the stapling measures within the bill which will enable duplicate accounts to be removed so that young Australians, when they enter into the workforce, don't have their superannuation eaten away in the fees and insurance premiums and administration fees by, principally, industry super funds, particularly Rest and Hostplus. Having consolidation around those accounts so that the money is saved for young Australians' retirement is of critical importance, and I support that. But, I am concerned about where it might lead, and I draw reference to the recent KPMG Super Insights 2021 report: On completion of the currently announced merger activity, based on 30 June 2020 data, 76 percent of Assets Under Management (AUM) and 77 per cent of member accounts will be managed by the top 12 funds, all with AUM>$50 billion. What we are creating by not fixing a broken system, and superannuation is a broken system designed to favour the few at the expense of the many, is a concentration of economic capital and with it power, where people are able to bypass our liberal democracy to impose matters through the imposition on companies and particularly publicly listed companies. That means that individual investors will lose their capacity, their clout and their say within businesses. Of course, unelected boards that run these superannuation funds—unelected, unaccountable boards—will be able to have a disproportionate say on the future direction of our country and the operations of our country in a way that used to come into this place, this place where we pass laws to decide the future direction. They will be able to bypass our liberal democracy. It's kind of ironic actually, that the Labor Party opposes this legislation or at least claims to, because, frankly, so many of their mates in the industry super fund sector actually get benefit from it. In fact, many of them argue in favour of it for that reason. Instead they want to create a false proxy war, because they want to be seen to be against it because it's proposed by a coalition government, when it will actually cement the power and the influence of many large superannuation funds. As I said, as somebody who is a Liberal, who believes in the decentralisation of power and not in the concentration of economic, social, political or cultural power in the hands of a few, I have deep concerns around that. There are also things in this bill that the members on the other side of the chamber don't support, and I do understand why that is. They don't support tests being put on how members' money is being spent to make sure it advances the financial interest of those members. I do understand why, because they see superannuation money as their money, as fund managers' money, as money to be laundered through the unions through marketing fees and the like to make its way into the hands of the Australian Labor Party. It is a broken system that needs to be fixed. I can understand why the Labor Party will fight that effort to fix that broken system every step of the way. We hear that confected outrage from the member for Fenner and his opposition to the Your Future, Your Super legislation because he said the Economics Committee rightly follows up on various superannuation funds and their misconduct, but he actually runs interference in those committees to support those doing wrong. We see this particularly when we question industry super funds and outline how they're misusing members' money, reactivating low-balance inactive accounts and using those accounts to be harvested for fees and insurance premiums that they are not entitled to. They're not following through their legal obligations to pass that money on to the Australian Taxation Office, so it can be protected. I can understand why the member for Fenner dislikes us calling that conduct out because it means less money, less fees and less opportunity for the Labor Party to launder Australians' money. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 It being 1.30, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 39 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS COVID-19: Victoria 39 13:30 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser [by video link] My thoughts are with the residents and families of the BlueCross Western Gardens aged-care facility in Sunshine. It is disgraceful that vulnerable residents of Victoria's aged-care sector are once again at risk. So much of what Victoria is experiencing was foreseeable and avoidable. This government failed to learn the lessons of 2020. Yesterday, the government fumbled with even the most basic statistics. How many staff have been vaccinated? Who knows? Minister Colbeck says the government can't be sure how many aged-care workers have been vaccinated, but not to worry, he's comfortable with the situation. We know that staff working across multiple sites is an issue. Victoria has implemented measures to deal with this, but in aged-care facilities which the Morrison government regulates workers are forced to work across multiple sites because the government hasn't funded or regulated the sector properly. We know that this outbreak arose from a weakness in our quarantine system. Jane Halton said today, 'I'm disappointed that it certainly appears that we don't have continual adoption of best practice right across the system.' She continued, 'To say that I'm disappointed about that I think is the minimum, I would say.' Well, we all feel that way. But those most disappointed are Victorians who are today asking themselves why an avoidable lockdown, one that was just extended by another week, should have occurred at all under this hopeless government's watch. It's simply not good enough, and the most vulnerable Victorians are the ones most at risk. Fitzgerald, Mrs Joyce 39 13:31 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne It's with a heavy heart that today I pay tribute to Joyce Fitzgerald of Taree, who passed away last week aged 94 years. Joyce joined the Country Party back in 1949, when her husband, Jack, did. He was the secretary of the branch then. A staunch member and supporter, Joyce never missed a meeting, was a member of the ladies committee and went on to serve as secretary of the Manning Valley branch for over 30 years. Joyce was a lady from an era gone by, always immaculately dressed. Even in her later years she had an energy and love for life that was infectious to everyone around her. Joyce's contribution to the Manning Valley stretched far beyond the Country Party. She was a past president of the Chamber of Commerce, which when Joyce led it initiated recognition and reward for improved customer service. She was also coordinator for the Taree Aquatic Carnival festival queen and Taree show society candidates. She held the role of secretary for the Manning All Breeds Association, Mid North Coast quarter horse and the Manning Valley cattlemen's union and was founding secretary of Wingham Beef Week. Joyce had been a dairy farmer and in her heart she always was. She was a fierce advocate for the industry and for farmers. I pass my condolences on to Geraldine and Alston and their family. Vale, Joyce Fitzgerald. Reconciliation Week 40 13:33 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I rise today to pay tribute to the traditional custodians of the lands and waters of this place, the Ngunnawal and Ngambri peoples. I recognise their continuing connection to the lands, waters and people and pay my respects to elders past, present and emerging. Yesterday I had the privilege of attending the 2021 Queanbeyan Reconciliation Walk. I joined First Nations elders, residents and schoolchildren to honour the traditional custodians of Queanbeyan and surrounds. I was honoured to hear stories about land and culture from Aunty Tina Brown, take part in a smoking ceremony and flag raising and watch the dances by Justine Brown's amazing local Aboriginal organisation, Mulleun Dreaming. Reconciliation is about more than just voicing respect. True reconciliation can only come from maintaining active and attentive heads, hearts, and hands. Our Indigenous sisters and brothers have walked this land for over 60,000 years, with a rich and deep connection to it, which is something we could all spend more time understanding and respecting. Reconciliation Australia's theme for 2021 is 'More than a word'. It urges the reconciliation movement towards braver and more impactful action—action within our local communities, action to support self-determination and the Uluru Statement from the Heart. In Eden-Monaro I have established a group of elders or endorsed representatives from the Ngunnawal, Wiradjuri, Ngarigo and Yuin nations across our region, whom I consult and meet with to draw on their knowledge of my electorate and their wisdom. (Time expired) World Haemochromatosis Week 40 13:35 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I rise to acknowledge World Haemochromatosis Week. Haemochromatosis is a common, inherited disorder which causes too much iron to be absorbed and stored in the body. It is often underdiagnosed, even though one in 200 Australians is genetically predisposed to the disorder and one in 10 carries one copy of the gene change. The condition is often underdiagnosed because its early symptoms, fatigue, depression, and joint pain, are non-specific. Unfortunately, if left untreated, hereditary haemochromatosis may be fatal, because of its high rates of liver cirrhosis, diabetes and cancer. I personally know this, because my uncle died from this condition, a condition that could so easily have been avoided. Instead of dismissing his tiredness for 15 years, a simple iron test would have told this doctors that he was carrying too much iron. It would have told them his organs were literally rusting. But, more than that, if he knew his iron was too high, he could have simply given blood and his symptoms of iron overload could have been prevented. Giving blood regularly could have prevented this bronze diabetes, his fatigue, his liver cirrhosis and his premature death. Giving blood regularly would have also helped our depleted blood bank stores. Haemochromatosis is tricky to say, simple to test, easy to treat but tragic to ignore. Kingsford Smith Electorate: Castellorizian Association 40 13:36 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith The Cazzie Club is back in Kingsford. On 15 May, I was proud to attend the official opening of the new cultural centre, the Castellorizian. The Governor of New South Wales, Margaret Beazley, helped cut the ribbon with Archbishop Makarios, the current archbishop of the Greek Orthodox Church of Australia. He was there to bless the Castellorizian Association's new centre. I'm proud that this cultural hub is in our community, devoted to the traditions of Greek Australians from Castellorizio Island. Castellorizians first started settling in Australia in the late 19th century, with the New South Wales association formed in 1924. Many of the migrants from Castellorizio settled in our area, an important part of the cultural fabric of our community, reflected in the fact that Randwick City and the island of Castellorizio are sister cities. The new cultural centre focuses on helping preserve the stories of first generation migrants who helped shape our nation. Last month we saw the opening night of the Nifes Kores Ginekes exhibition at the Castellorizian, about traditional dress. It's part of the 39th Greek Festival of Sydney. The Castellorizian Association of New South Wales History and Archives Committee proudly showcased the myths, charm and origins of the distinctive dresses of the island. I commend the efforts of George Pizanis, the President of the Castellorizian Association of New South Wales, as well as the work of the board of directors on the opening of this landmark cultural centre in our community. Centenary of Rotary Australia 40 13:38 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney This year is an important year for Rotary as it celebrates its centenary in Australia. It was in 1921, 16 years after Paul Harris established the first Rotary club in Chicago, that Rotary reached our stores. In that year, four clubs were formed in Sydney and Melbourne and across the ditch in Auckland and Wellington. Since then, Rotary has blossomed and Australia is now home to over 1,000 clubs with 30,000 members. Of course, over 100 years, Rotary has changed, including through the removal of gender barriers. But some things haven't changed. The Rotary motto of 'service above self' remains a driving force in the ethos which has seen Rotary contribute so much to our local and global communities. I'm proud to be a Rotarian and also to represent an electorate which is home to so many active and vibrant Rotary clubs. I was reminded of this over the weekend when I saw so many Rotarians supporting the Salvation Army's Red Shield Appeal. Rotary does an amazing job in bringing communities together, and many join for the fellowship that can be found at Rotary gatherings. Its role is, however, much deeper. Rotary clubs fundraise and organise to support their communities, particularly to help the most vulnerable, and globally they have made a difference in their support for aid projects or major campaigns like the elimination of polio. To all Rotarians in Australia, including the wonderful members of my own club, North Sydney Sunrise: happy 100th birthday and thank you for all you have achieved for Australians. COVID-19: Quarantine 41 13:39 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin The Marshall and Morrison governments' proposal to use the aviation student accommodation village at Parafield Airport as a quarantine facility for around 160 international university students at a time is causing angst among nearby residents, who last year were subjected to a COVID outbreak. Locals were not consulted about the proposal, and they want to know: what discussions, if any, have taken place with adjoining business operators; who will oversee the quarantine arrangements; what restrictions will apply to those in quarantine; will any flight training students simultaneously reside in the village; where will prospective students come from and what selection criteria will apply; who will be permitted to enter and exit the village; what will be the role of the federal government in oversight of a quarantine facility on Commonwealth land; how will the weekly accommodation costs be calculated; and why was the Parafield Airport Consultative Committee not consulted about this proposal at its very recent meeting on 20 May? All of these questions needs satisfactory answers before the Parafield Airport housing is used for quarantine. The national and state governments' first responsibility is to keep people safe. Furthermore, governments should prioritise the return home of the thousands of Australians who are currently stranded overseas and desperately want to come home. Community Bank Epping 41 13:41 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong I would like to acknowledge a wonderful asset in my community of Bennelong. A few weeks ago Community Bank Epping, which is a full-service branch of Bendigo Bank, held the official grand opening of its brand new branch office in Pembroke Street, Epping. For those who may not be aware of the community bank model, the bank's core mission is to support the growth and strength of the local community using profits from its banking services. The Community Bank Epping puts 80 per cent of its profits back into community projects and groups. In recent years, money has been put towards a vast number of projects, including the Northern Centre's Parenting Program, the Macquarie Singers and the Epping District Athletics Club. The bank has also partnered with numerous organisations such as Rotary, the Christian Community Aid Service and the Lions Club of Epping-Eastwood to support their work. It's wonderful to see the bank listening and responding to the needs of our local community. They are an extremely important asset, and I've been continually impressed by the scale of their impact. I was unfortunately unable to attend their grand opening, but I'm looking forward to seeing their new office and catching up with the branch manager, Mr Stephen Hu, in the not-too-distant future. Modern Australia 41 13:42 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy There are no public liability insurers left in Australia that will underwrite show rides. The insatiable greed of the university law schools, producing unconscionable numbers of undergraduates, is a locomotive driving this anti-freedom machine. Australians are going to have the iron ball shackled to our ankles. The unconscionable, untrammelled rapaciousness of the power elites has taken every aspect of our culture, our freedom and our fun. I represent the freedom and fun party. Our enemies are the boa constrictors of Australian life. They have taken off us the right to protect our homes and our country. They violate our person at airports, with pat-down action that in any other circumstance is banned by law. This is justified to achieve safety in the skies, when there hasn't been an incident in 30 years. A bloke can't boil a billy over a camp fire. He can't have a drink at the pub anymore. A bloke can't have a smoke. He can't have admiration for women's beauty without charges of sexual harassment. He can't fish. He can't camp. He can't hunt. He can't shoot. We have the politically correct brigade strongly banning body contact in our great game of rugby league. They've taken all of this off us under the guise of 'what is good for us'. We have the PC class telling us what is good for us. Now they are taking our school fetes, circuses, rodeos, country shows, exhibitions and music festivals. These bureaucratic— (Time expired) Westminster School 41 13:44 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby Westminster School recently celebrated the official opening of its new Inquiry and Innovation Hub, named the Carter Wing, and I was delighted to be in attendance. Westminster School is located in the heart of my electorate of Boothby and has educated many generations of locals, including my father, Evan, and my Uncle Tim. The new Inquiry and Innovation Hub is a fantastic facility with new learning spaces and laboratories in which students will gain knowledge of the sciences, psychology, engineering, information technology, digital technology, fashion design, materials and food technology. This investment by Westminster is the first stage of a $40 million upgrade to the school, the largest re-investment in the school since it was opened by Prime Minister Sir Robert Menzies in 1961. Our current Prime Minister, the Hon. Scott Morrison MP, recorded a special video message in acknowledgement of the opening, and the South Australian Governor, His Excellency the Hon. Hiew Van Le, officially opened the new building. I again offer my heartfelt congratulations to Westminster School; their principal, Simon Shepherd; school council chairman Phillip Styles; and the entire Westminster School community on the opening of the Carter Wing. I was particularly delighted to see former teachers Brian Ferris, Ray Trenowden and David Jarman and his wife Jeanette there at the celebration. Not only were they teachers for many years at this wonderful school but they are all incredible, very active local volunteers in our Boothby community. Westminster School has been one of the pillars of primary and secondary education in Boothby. I congratulate it on this exciting new development. Corangamite Electorate: COVID-19 42 13:45 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite A group calling themselves Reignite Democracy Australia has dropped an irresponsible and dangerous pamphlet across the Bellarine Peninsula and the Surf Coast spruiking that people can say no to the vaccine. But saying no will only endanger everyone's safety. Barwon South Western public health unit director Professor Eugene Athan responded this way: Both Pfizer and … AstraZeneca vaccines have been approved by the TGA and are safe and effective. Today my electorate received some disappointing news. Several sites in Anglesea have been named as tier 1 exposure sites. If you have attended the Anglesea Golf Club, the landfill station, the IGA supermarket or the Oaks Bakery between 25 and 27 May, you must get tested as soon as possible, and please go to the Department of Health website for further medical advice. The path through COVID is clear. We need to roll out the vaccine and we need everyone who can get the jab to get the jab. If you are uncertain about how the vaccine may affect you, please speak to your GP. This is how we'll beat this pandemic. This is how we will enter a post-COVID world. I urge those distributing the flyer to stop. It's not mandatory to receive the vaccine, but there is overwhelming evidence based on the science to do the right thing and get the jab. If you receive the pamphlet in your letterbox put it in the trash where it belongs. Goldstein Electorate: Manufacturing 42 13:47 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein Australia's economic comeback will continue to be built on the future of competitive private enterprise and what it can do for employing Australians to be able to get a secure job on a competitive product. Based in Cheltenham, although technically, I need to concede, it is in the Isaacs part of Cheltenham, stone and porcelain services fabricator VBG has recently received a grant of $934,000 under the Morrison governments modern manufacturing fund, but like all good things in the that are based in Isaacs, it's owned by people in the electorate of Goldstein. We say thank you to owners George, Gene and Kostas Kalpakidis, who have described how the funding will empower them to invest in reskilling and new technologies in the dangerous area of silica, using water based treatments to make it safer. The grant will help create jobs for the future of VBG's employees and, of course, the community. VBG's employees include Andrew Graham, Bowen Leng, Vasilis Joras and Yuri Papko. It is at the forefront of the new era in Australian manufacturing, which the government is launching and supporting every step of the work. It is important that our post-COVID employee create new employment opportunities rather than rely on those that are fading. The pandemic has exposed a number of points of fragility in our economy, our overdependence on certain exports and the risks to the growth industries. That is why, through the modern manufacturing fund, we are backing high-skill, high-growth sectors that can create jobs for local residents and Goldstein, Isaacs and across Victoria. Gilmore Electorate: COVID-19 42 13:48 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore Last night New South Wales Health issued a COVID public health alert for Jervis Bay, Hyams Beach and Vincentia. A confirmed case of COVID-19 from Melbourne was in the area on 23 and 24 May while potentially infectious. True to form, people in my electorate are taking precautions and have responded well. Pop-up drive-through COVID testing clinics have been set up at Huskisson, Vincentia and Nowra, and existing testing sites will have extended services. People are doing the right thing and lining up for COVID testing, even if they have the mildest of cold symptoms. But it's disappointing that the Morrison government has completely bungled the COVID vaccination roll out. They only had two jobs—the vaccine rollout and national quarantine – and they failed both. Not all residents in my local aged-care facilities are fully vaccinated. There are still aged-care workers and nurses in aged-care homes that are not vaccinated. Many of the elderly and vulnerable in my electorate have told me they have not been able to get vaccinated at their GP. Why? Because there are not enough vaccines. Fifty or 100 doses of vaccine at their local GP doesn't stack up, particularly in a regional area where there's no public transport and people are immobile. What is the Morrison government's plan to help regional people to be vaccinated? What is the Morrison government's doing to make sure aged-care workers and nurses are vaccinated? It's beyond time for the Morrison government to step up and provide the protections people in my communities rightfully deserve. 3rd Battalion, Royal Australian Regiment: 50th Anniversary, Betts, Pilot Officer Ronald William (Ron) 43 13:50 Mrs ARCHER 282237 Bass This weekend veterans and their families will attend the Australian War Memorial to mark the 50th anniversary of the 3rd Battalion, RAR. For Judith and Harley Stanton from Youngtown in northern Tasmania, these events will be particularly moving, as part of the service will be dedicated to their brother and brother-in-law Ronald William Betts. Pilot Officer Betts, a member of the ninth squadron, was the first RAAF pilot to be killed in Vietnam, on 20 March 1971, when the squadron was called in to support the 3rd Battalion, RAR. He was just 24 years old. Born in Launceston in 1947, Ronald was the son of Mannie Betts, a radio operator with the RAAF during World War II. According to his family, all Ron ever wanted to do was learn to fly. On 20 March 1971, the helicopter he was co-piloting received 47 gunshots. Betts was medevaced to Long Binh but sadly succumbed to his injuries. The pilot who transported Ron to hospital that day was his mate Peter Armstrong. He remembers Ron as a very popular and well-liked bloke and said that, in Vietnam, his piano playing after a few beers was enjoyed by many. His death really shook the ninth squadron. Peter eventually carried the Australian flag bearing Ron's name when the Vietnam veterans were finally give a welcome home march. To Judith and Harley, I hope this event is a fitting tribute to a young man who sacrificed his life in service to our country. Member for Bowman, Employment, Education and Training Committee 43 13:51 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper The member for Bendigo, the member for Lalor and I have today written to the Prime Minister to request that he removes the member for Bowman as the Chair of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training. We are the Labor members on this committee. We are all women. It is our view—and we believe the view of many—that the member for Bowman's continuing role as chair is untenable. Every day he continues in this role, a standard is set that terrible behaviour, including threatening online behaviour towards women, has no consequences. Maintaining the appointment as chair of a parliamentary standing committee is a privilege. It requires the highest standards, and we feel he falls short of those standards. Therefore he diminishes the committee, the House and the parliament each day he remains in that office. We do not feel comfortable travelling with the member for Bowman on committee business. We fear expert witnesses will be reluctant to appear before the committee while the member for Bowman remains in that role. The Labor Party has asked the House to take action to have the member for Bowman removed as chair, but this action has not been supported by those opposite. The House standing orders empower the Prime Minister to appoint the chair of each standing committee. We often remark in the building that the behaviour you walk past is the behaviour you accept. We are asking the PM to stop walking past shocking behaviour and do something about it. COVID-19: Vaccination 43 13:53 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff I want to take this opportunity to address the rubbish that's coming out of Labor state governments over the last couple of days around vaccination rollout. Let's be clear: on 22 April, the states and territories at national cabinet agreed to work together on the vaccination rollout strategy. Now they've flip-flopped when it suits them to blame the federal government for their own failures to Queenslanders and to Victorians. As for the article in The Courier Mail today in Queensland that the Queensland government plans to fix the government's aged-care rollout, I say to Queenslanders that this is more rubbish and this is more incorrect political rhetoric coming from Queensland Labor. The Queensland state government has used their own low numbers of vaccination rollout to blame the federal government. It's what they do. It's the spin and not the substance. It's what Labor do best: the politics and not the business of running state governments, certainly in Queensland. The truth is that the Queensland Labor government has actually wasted some of the vaccinations that have been delivered by the federal government. They won't talk about it, but they have only utilised 64 per cent of the vaccinations that have been provided to them. The other 36 per cent have been wasted. It's disgraceful, it's unconscionable, and it's not good enough for the good people of the great state of Queensland. COVID-19: Victoria 44 13:54 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I rise today as a proud Victorian and a proud Australian to say thank you to the tens of thousands of Victorians who are getting tested every day during this lockdown and to the tens of thousands getting vaccinated during this lockdown. I want to thank those who have been close contacts who are isolating. I want to thank those who are staying at home and keeping the rest of this country safe because there is no doubt this lockdown in Victoria is about keeping the rest of Australia safe, so we're doing our bit in Victoria and we're doing our bit in a situation where we know the federal government has failed in the vaccine rollout, they have failed in quarantine—two of their only jobs—but, more importantly, they are failing now. Just now, outside this House, the member for Kooyong, who claims to be for forgotten Australians, who has forgotten 6.6 million fellow Victorians, has doubled down and said this federal government will offer no support for workers and no extra support for businesses in Victoria. So while in Victoria we're busy keeping people safe, the member for Kooyong has turned into someone who talks about potato scallops; the man has gone mad. He needs to come into this place and support Victorians who have no work this week because they're casuals, who are struggling to pay the rent and the mortgage this week because they're casuals. This federal government needs to take responsibility. They won't learn anything until they do. COVID-19: Victoria 44 13:56 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash Mr Speaker, you will agree with me that today in Victoria we have many people in distress, including in your own electorate. I have spoken to my colleague the member for Calwell. She has a number of issues around her electorate that are most difficult to deal with at this time. Every one of us, whatever side of this House we're on, are facing great difficulties. Even my own family are struggling to find out what they can and what they can't do, what my daughter is able to do with her daughter and what my wife is able to do. I wouldn't be a stranger in that place and none of us are strangers in this place. There are people who are under great stress today and we identify, as Victorians, with every one of them. Our heart goes out to them, our care goes out to them and every effort is being put in on their behalf to make sure the most vulnerable are cared for. In this, we are all Australians and we are all Victorians. It's important for this nation to know what is happening. Maria is here now. Maria, thank you for the work you're doing on behalf of your constituents and we're doing as much we can on behalf of ours. That's Victoria together. We will stay together and we'll do this together, and Victorians will rise to the occasion and do the best they can in the conditions they are surrounded by. COVID-19: Vaccination 44 13:57 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs COVID has killed 685 residents of aged-care homes, including 17 in just one home in my electorate. Twelve months on, COVID still threatens aged-care residents, and we have a federal government failing to protect aged-care workers and the people they are caring for. We have another week of lockdown in Victoria, which might have been avoided if the vaccination rollout had been treated as urgent, which it undoubtedly is. How could this happen? Why have fewer than one-in-10 aged-care workers been vaccinated months after the government declared them the priority? Why are some aged-care residents only today being offered their first vaccination? The Minister for Health claimed every aged-care home in Victoria had been vaccinated. But when I confronted him with the fact that one home in my community had received no vaccinations, he said that was not his responsibility. The longer we take to vaccinate, the more lives are at risk and the greater the chances of more distressing and costly lockdowns. The Prime Minister has failed every target he set. His version of a vaccination program is more about marketing slogans than about protecting Australians. It is urgent and it is a race. It's time to stop blaming others and focus on fixing the Morrison government's vaccination debacle for the sake of all Australians. National Security 44 13:59 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson Australia must reclaim the Port of Darwin. In February this year, I delivered the Pivot report from the Joint Standing Committee for Trade and Investment Growth which recommended the government assess whether or not the Port of Darwin's lease to the Chinese Communist Party-owned Landbridge Group is in the national interest. It's not in the national interest to have port infrastructure in the hands of a foreign company, particularly a company from communist China which has recently used trade as a tool for economic coercion. Fighting for Australia's national interest should not be controversial yet this morning I read that the Leader of the Opposition describing our government's efforts as 'nationalistic'. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Dawson will resume his seat. In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 45 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE COVID-19: Vaccination 45 14:00 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley My question is to the Prime Minister. Marion from Carrum Downs called my office furious when she heard the Prime Minister say that the vaccination rollout was not a race. For Marion it's a race. It's a race to see her husband again in aged care. It's a race to protect herself after her battle with breast cancer. Why has the Prime Minister failed Australians like Marion with his vaccine rollout? 14:00 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I'd be very pleased to receive further details so that we can extend our care and support to the constituent that you've referred to as she particularly is facing these difficult days ahead with her treatment, as cancer sufferers around the country are. This is a very difficult time, no doubt, for them, and as these other issues are impacting the nation I can understand how they can add further distress. It is very important that we move as quickly as we possibly can and as effectively and as safely as we can to vaccinate as many Australians as possible. Those are the comments that I've made. They're what our health advisers have also said. Today, we received the news that over 700,000 Australians have been vaccinated in the past week and over 130,000 Australians in one day. They are record numbers again. In the course of the past month the rate of vaccination in this country amongst eligible Australians has increased by over 100 per cent. It's doubled. It's doubled in the course of the past month. There were some two million in the first 66 days and a further two million in the next 30 days. The changes that were introduced, as I drew the national cabinet together back in April to put the plan into place that ensured that we increased the vaccination rates in this country, have been effective, because we've seen the vaccination rates double over the course of the past month. It is important for all Australians to roll up their sleeve on this project. We are seeing more and more Australians roll up their sleeve. Ms Swanson interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Paterson will leave under standing order 94(a). Mr MORRISON E3L The state premiers, together with the chief ministers and myself, the members of my government— Ms Swanson interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Paterson will resume her seat. The Prime Minister will resume his seat. I asked the member for Paterson to leave under standing order 94(a). On her way out she interjected yet again. Does she know that that is highly disorderly and usually results in a naming? Does the member for Paterson wish to apologise to the House? Ms Swanson 264170 I apologise, Mr Speaker, wholeheartedly. The SPEAKER 00APG You can now leave under 94(a). That is the last time I will do that. I'm very happy later in question time, if this arises again, to explain the practice and to explain how I've been lenient on that occasion. I've done that so as not to disturb question time for the vast bulk of members who aren't interjecting, but I'll have no choice if members think they can backchat the chair on the way out. It's not going to happen. It's disrespectful to the rest of you and it's unbecoming of an elected member of parliament. The Prime Minister has the call. Mr MORRISON E3L Thank you, Mr Speaker. So we must move forward quickly and effectively and safely. The remarks that I made on this matter back in March reflected the remarks made by Queensland Health, when they said on 3 March, 'This is not a race'; the AMA president on 10 April, when he said, 'It is not a race to the finish line'; and Professor Murphy on 10 March. Professor Murphy, with whom I wholeheartedly agree, made further comments yesterday, which I also agree with. So, rather than the opposition getting into arguments about words, perhaps they'd like to support the government— The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order. Mr Burke DYW My point of order is on direct relevance, Mr Speaker. This is about a woman wanting to be able to see her husband again, who is a cancer survivor. For that to be ridiculed as being an objection about words is offensive and irrelevant to the question that was asked. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister has the call. Mr MORRISON E3L I reject what the member, in coming to the dispatch box—I was referring to the comments about race. I already extended my great sympathies to the constituent in question, as the member should know. The opposition can continue to play politics with the vaccination program, or they can support the national effort. Over the course of this pandemic, the opposition has sought to play politics with the pandemic, and they should be ashamed of that. We will get on with the job. (Time expired) COVID-19: Economy 46 14:05 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert Will the Prime Minister inform the House how the Morrison government is setting the foundation for our continued economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic by creating a safer and more secure Australia? 14:05 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook The battle against COVID-19 continues, as particularly those in Victoria will know, with the disappointing news that has been announced today. But Victoria and Australia will continue to overcome, as we have throughout the course of the pandemic. As I referred to in my earlier answer, the fact that we've had 700,000 vaccinations in the past week is a great indication of the way that Australians are rallying together around this program to ensure that Australians can be as safe as we possibly can be. Just as we have prevailed on occasions before, so the national accounts data today shows how Australia's resilience and Australia's recovery is certainly underway. We have an economy that is bigger today than it was before the pandemic hit. Not only have we now got employment at a level higher than when the pandemic hit, but, after the shocking blow of the pandemic, and the pandemic recession it has caused, in the course of just one year we now have an economy that is bigger today than it was before the pandemic, and there are more people in work today than before the pandemic began. As the Treasurer, I'm sure, has already noted, this is a result in the national accounts that means that this is an Australians led recovery. In the data, we see the performance on households: families in their households and the consumption and believing in their economic future and taking decisions to support Australia. We have seen it in Australians building homes at record levels, supported by the HomeBuilder program, in the dwelling investment figures. And we've seen it with businesses investing: a business-led economy has been the outcome sought by our policies to restore growth in the Australian economy and to ensure that our growth in the economy can continue into the future. It shows that our plan is working. The Australian recovery plan set out by the Treasurer in the budget, this year and in last year's budget, shows that our plan is working to restore the Australian economy, and we've already have seen our economy grow to levels higher than before the pandemic hit. But that's not the only threat that we face in terms of the pandemic. We will continue to remain focused on our national security and our regional security. The upcoming overseas meetings in the G7 will be important opportunities. I will be visiting Singapore on the way, to engage with one of our most important ASEAN partners, to secure our regional relationships and to secure our broader international relationships, which are so important to Australia's national security. I mentioned yesterday that I have been able to stand with the New Zealand Prime Minister, and we are on the same page on our national issues and national security. I hope the Leader of the Opposition can stand too, and be on the same page. COVID19: Vaccination 46 14:08 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat My question is to the Prime Minister. At an aged-care home in my electorate, five residents missed out on their first dose of COVID vaccine because federal government contractors arrived without enough doses. The residents were told to go to a GP clinic to get them, but the residents are frail and immobile. Why on earth is the government telling people who are frail and immobile to find their way to a local GP clinic for their vaccine? 14:09 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I'm very pleased to respond to the member for Ballarat. I'd be pleased and grateful to receive the details of the facility. We know that across Victoria all Commonwealth aged-care facilities have received a first dose. We currently have 50 in-reach clinics being conducted this week for any facilities where there are residents within that facility who have not received a first dose. We would be very happy—as we are right through all of these—to ensure that those residents are scheduled. I can't speak for what was said to them on the time, but I can say that our program is to ensure that there is in-reach over and above that which has already occurred. One hundred per cent of Commonwealth residential aged-care facilities within Victoria have received a first dose. We currently have the next phase of delivering the second doses to all facilities and, if they did not receive a dose in the first round, they would be entitled to receive it in the second. If that is not the case, there is also the additional program, which is in relation to that, of the roving clinics which are being provided. There are 50 such mobile clinics that are occurring inside facilities, on my advice, this week. COVID-19: Economy 47 14:11 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer inform the House about how the Morrison government's plan to secure our economic recovery is ensuring Australia leads the global recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic? Is the Treasurer aware of any alternative approaches? 14:11 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Lindsay for her work in the not-for-profit sector before she came to this place. I had the opportunity recently to join the member for Lindsay in Penrith to meet with business that are using the immediate expensing provisions in this year's budget to help them employ more Australians and to grow their business. Today's national accounts show that the Australian economy is leading the world, with the March quarter seeing GDP growth of 1.8 per cent—beating market expectations of 1.5 per cent. What we saw in today's numbers was a broad-based recovery, a private sector-led recovery, with household consumption being up, with dwelling investment being up, with business investment being up and with machinery and equipment being up. Over the March quarter we saw the British economy contract, we saw the French economy contract, we saw the German economy contract and we saw the Japanese economy contract, but we saw the Australian economy expand. With today's national account numbers, we know that the Australian economy is today bigger than it was going into the pandemic, ahead of any major advanced economy around the world. We recently saw employment in Australia now higher than it was pre-pandemic, ahead of any major advanced economy in the world, and today we saw that GDP growth is now ahead of any major advanced economy in the world. I know that regional members on this side of the House will be interested to know that we have seen through the year farm GDP more than 38 per cent higher per cent higher, the best numbers through the year in 17 years. That is more jobs; that is more export income; that is a stronger economy. We saw in today's numbers dwelling investment up by more than six per cent—the strongest numbers in 17 years—because of HomeBuilder, which has helped support more than $30 billion of residential economic activity, with more than 130,000 applications. This side of the House is focused on more jobs. This side of the House is focused on lower taxes. This side of the House is delivering a stronger economy. Ms Plibersek interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Sydney. Now, before I call the next questioner, I'm just going to remind members: if you interject, you'll be ejected. I shouldn't have to do this every day. But I'm going to point out: whilst there's been a large number of ejections, they relate to a very small number of people who are continual offenders. Some of them are looking at me quite closely now. So let's have no surprise about this. Let's have none of the social media nonsense about, 'I got ejected because I was standing up for X, Y and Z.' You got ejected because you're breaking the standing orders. It's really, really clear. And, if you need me to start pointing out who's been ejected how many times, I'm happy to do it for the benefit of your electorates. I believe in a lot of transparency. COVID-19: Vaccination 47 14:15 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga [by video link] My question is to the Prime Minister. At an aged-care facility in my electorate, staff were notified they would be given vaccinations this week by a government contractor, but, just minutes after this notification, the vaccinations were cancelled and the facility was advised it was not considered to be a sufficient risk. When aged-care workers haven't been vaccinated, why does the Prime Minister still say it's not a race? 14:15 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders To the member for Jagajaga: I'd be pleased to receive the details of which particular facility. There was a case yesterday where the member for Isaacs raised a facility and it did turn out not to be a Commonwealth facility. However, we would be very much keen to receive the details, to understand the circumstances and to ensure that the details are available. I will say, in relation to in-reach for aged-care workers, that, at this point in time, over 40,000 workers—17.3 per cent of Commonwealth aged-care workers—have received doses on a first basis, and, of those, 34,390 have received second doses. So there is a significant program. There are four additional channels that are available for those workers. The first, of course, is in relation to the general practice in-reach program. The second is in relation to the ability to be vaccinated at general practices. The third is in relation to the ability to be vaccinated at Commonwealth GP respiratory clinics or Commonwealth clinics. The fourth is in relation to state and territory Pfizer clinics, and that was a decision of the national cabinet, I believe, Prime Minister, on 22 April, which has been adopted by the majority of states and territories, and one has added to that in the last 24 hours, we understand. Then, finally, of course, there is the in-reach program itself, which has seen well over 70,000 vaccinations. So, if the details could be provided, we'd be happy to follow up and respond. Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility: CopperString Project 48 14:17 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy Minister, NAIF: in six years— The SPEAKER 00APG No, no—you've just said 'Minister'. There's a lot of them here! Can you just say which minister? Mr KATTER HX4 The one responsible for NAIF! The SPEAKER 00APG No, you've actually got to say who it is. Do you want me to go to the next question and come back? Mr KATTER HX4 The resources minister. The SPEAKER 00APG Thank you. Okay. We'll start the clock again. You've got your 45 seconds. Mr KATTER HX4 Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. In six years, all NAIF's done is extend a JCU building. Minister, you are the hero cutting the Gordian knot, unleashing the locomotive of prosperity. Won't your NAIF CopperString initiative stop the strangulation of the North West Minerals Province and overcome the crippling effects of diesel generators and a tiny gas-fired power-station monopoly, which create electricity costs crushing what should be the world's greatest mineral province? Minister, with NAIF's CopperString, won't we build the golden pit of prosperity? 14:19 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler Can I thank the honourable member for that question. I've heard a lot of associations with my last name, but that's a new one! I'm asked about the NAIF itself and of course the CopperString project, which is expected to extend from Townsville to Mount Isa. It is an important project, which we are taking seriously, I say to the member for Kennedy. We intend to continue to deliver for the north. We intend to continue to deliver for the people of northern Australia—the people in the member's electorate and right across the north. I understand the value of the North West Minerals Province and the particular value that something like CopperString could provide to the North West Minerals Province. It could generate around 750 jobs. But we've already provided some $5 million of support, in 2019, and another grant of around $11 million recently to help the proponents in terms of their design. But I am asked about NAIF considering the project. It is inappropriate for me to comment on something completely in the NAIF's purview. However, my understanding is that—they have an independent process—they are meeting regularly with the proponent and they will make their advice in terms of that decision and put it to me as the minister. I'd encourage them to continue to do that, particularly for the CopperString proponents. This is a project which has been around for some time. But, if it gives any comfort to the member for Kennedy, in part of the review of the NAIF we have announced that we have got regions of growth, and one of those pilot locations is from Townsville to Mount Isa, as the result of a lot of lobbying from colleagues, right across the north. That is a particular area which we are focusing on as part of the work we expect to do with the NAIF. But I do have to take issue with one of the points in the question, and that is around what the NAIF has done, particularly in Queensland and how many projects it's actually supporting. It's over $1 billion in Queensland already. We know that we have Signature Onfarm out at Clermont—the Anguses—a $24 million loan for a processing facility out there, a fabulous facility. That is underway. We've seen photos of that construction— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will just pause for a second. The member for Kennedy. Mr Katter HX4 Point of order: misrepresentation. I meant before he became minister. He's been great. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Kennedy will resume his seat. That really is a new one, I've got to say. Mr PITT 148150 There is Metro Mining, with some $47 million for a new floating terminal up north of Weipa, and, of course, the North Queensland Cowboys, the new centre of excellence up there—some $20 million in support for a loan. James Cook University, Mater Health, Queensland Airports, Central Queensland Uni—there is a significant amount of support from the NAIF into those areas. We have made changes recently with legislation. I want the NAIF to be able to provide more money for projects of a different type. We have absolutely ensured that they can be more reactive, that they can fund projects of a different type. We want to make sure that the NAIF, if it does eventually allocate all of the funds—it's got roughly $3 billion allocated already— Mr Bowen interjecting— Mr Thompson interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for McMahon and the member for Herbert can leave under 94(a). That will lower the volume. The member for McMahon and the member for Herbert then left the chamber. Mr PITT 148150 The NAIF has already allocated almost $3 billion. There is around $2 billion left in the current $5 billion facility. I'd be happy to go back to the PM and the ERC and ask for more if that's necessary. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 00APG We don't want ERC in here! COVID-19: Economic Recovery 49 14:22 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Will the Deputy Prime Minister inform the House how the Morrison-McCormack government is setting the foundations for our continued economic recovery from COVID-19 by investing in the safety of local community projects, particularly in my electorate of Flynn? 14:23 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina From North Queensland to Central Queensland, we're talking about Queensland because Queensland is one of the powerhouses of this nation which is going to help us recover from COVID-19. It's leading the way as far as making sure that there is agriculture, resources, growth and jobs. I congratulate each and every Queensland member for the role that they are playing in this process, certainly those on this side of the House. The government is spending $110 billion on infrastructure. That's supporting 100,000 workers. In the budget, there is another $15.2 billion of infrastructure, and that's supporting an extra 30,000 workers right across the nation, particularly in Central Queensland. What an economic powerhouse, what a driver of growth, that particular region is. And it's led by the member for Flynn. Indeed, the member for Capricornia has a large part to play in that, and the member for Dawson—I could go on. I think you get my drift. We are so proud of the fact that the resources sector is strong. Iron ore prices are US$208 per tonne today. Our agriculture, as the minister for agriculture will tell us, has grown $6 billion, despite the drought, despite COVID, despite bushfires, to $66 billion, and we'll get on and make it a $100 billion sector by 2030. Our annual GDP has grown 1.1 per cent in the March quarter. That is good news. We should be talking that up. We should be proud of that. As we come out of COVID-19, and hopefully that won't be too far away—but we're a long way from it yet—we are going to be having to rely on those regions, particularly Gladstone. Our $100 million Gladstone port access road extension is enabling our resources to more efficiently reach the port to be shipped to export destinations around the world, and of course we've invested $2.1 million in the Biloela heavy vehicle bypass in the member for Flynn's electorate. The mayor of Banana shire, Councillor Neville Ferrier, said: 'This project will create up to 10 local construction jobs, supporting the council's workforce and local contractors at a time it's needed most. The bypass has been a priority here for some time, so we are proud to be working with the Australian government to make it a reality for our community.' Our $2½ billion investment in the Local Road and Community Infrastructure Program is driving jobs in every corner of the nation, but particularly in the electorate of Flynn, where, indeed, the eight councils are receiving $54.8 million, $7 million to Banana shire— Dr Freelander interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Macarthur can leave under standing order 94(a). The member for Macarthur then left the chamber. Mr McCORMACK 219646 The list of investments in Flynn goes on and on. I could continue, but the member for Macarthur just wasted about five seconds of my time. The SPEAKER 00APG I will just say to the Deputy Prime Minister he didn't actually! Mr McCormack interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG You did have three whole minutes, less six seconds. An honourable member interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I'd get the punchline in earlier if you're worried about that! An honourable member interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG No, it is over, so there's nothing to extend. COVID-19: Vaccination 49 14:26 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin My question is to the Prime Minister. Rory is a 42-year-old with autism. He's non-verbal and has complex mental health issues. He lives in disability group accommodation in my electorate. Rory and everyone in his group accommodation are scared because they are unvaccinated and unprotected against COVID. The government should be racing to vaccinate people in disability care, so why hasn't the Prime Minister done his job? 14:27 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for his question. The government will continue, with the various agencies and supports and the various platforms we have, to distribute the vaccine through the national vaccination strategy, which includes the work we do with states and territories, which is part of the plan that was agreed back in April. That plan saw a greater role for the states and territories in providing more platforms, more points of access, for the vaccination program to reach all Australians, particularly the most vulnerable Australians. Of the approximately 27,000 people with disability in residential settings, there have been more than 10,000 doses now and more than 7,000 people have been vaccinated. That's around 25 per cent of people in residential care that have been vaccinated. That is towards the end of last month, 29 May. The Commonwealth inreach vaccination service will visit 83 disability residential accommodation sites in Victoria to vaccinate vulnerable citizens. The first of the specialist disability vaccination hubs, in Thomastown, was established the week before last and is vaccinating more than 120 people a day. Of the broader NDIS population aged 16 years and older, 35,000 participants had been vaccinated on the most recent information I have from 29 May. We will continue to roll out these programs to the most vulnerable Australians, in particular those who are living with disabilities. As I have remarked in this place before, one of Australia's greatest successes during the course of COVID-19 has been where, in situations with people with disabilities and, in particular, those in remote Aboriginal communities, we've been able to avoid having high levels of infection rates among those communities. That is a great credit to those who work with people who have disabilities, their carers, those who are working in those residential facilities and the infection control procedures that they put in place in those facilities. And we will continue to roll out that vaccination program as quickly and as safely as possible. Economy 50 14:29 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer inform the House how the Morrison government's investment incentives and tax cuts are backing Australian businesses to drive our continued economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and, Treasurer, are you aware of any alternatives? 14:30 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Braddon for his question and acknowledge his experience as a farmer, as a soldier and as a strong advocate for his community. I had the opportunity to join with the Prime Minister in visiting the member for Braddon's electorate recently. We went out to the RSL. We did an event with the local community. We went to Blackley irrigation, a small business that is expanding, taking on new people and using the immediate expensing provisions to buy new equipment. We saw in today's national accounts how the government's measures to promote immediate expensing and investment and the tax relief that we're providing the Australian community is helping to make our economy stronger. In fact, in the last three quarters, we have seen the economy grow by 8.7 per cent, which is the strongest growth over the last three quarters that Australia has seen since 1968, the strongest economic growth in more than half a century. And as Japan, France, the United Kingdom and Germany all contracted over the course of the March quarter, the Australian economy actually expanded. It expanded. What was particularly pleasing to see in the numbers today was what is happening to investment—dwelling investment, business investment, machinery and equipment. We saw dwelling investment lift by more than six per cent, the strongest result that we have seen in 17 years. We saw business investment increase a bit more than three per cent but, importantly, machinery and equipment was up by more than 10 per cent, the strongest result in 11 years. What is happening through this recession and the period of recovery after it is businesses are backing themselves. Instead of going on a capital strike, as you normally see through a recession, they're taking advantage of the immediate expensing and loss carry-back provisions that the government put in the budget last year that we extended in this year's budget and they're actually backing themselves. They're also capitalising on the tax relief, the extension of the low- and middle-income tax offset. We saw in these national accounts household income increase by one per cent, with more than $3 billion of tax cuts to more than 11 million people going over the course of the March quarter, and we saw more than 290,000 jobs being created over that period as well. So what we're seeing is the Australian economy capitalising on lower taxes, the Australian economy capitalising on the immediate expensing provisions and the Australian economy delivering more jobs. They're our policies and that's why we're sticking with our plan. COVID-19: Vaccination 51 14:33 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong My question is to the Prime Minister: The government promised that all disability-care residents would be vaccinated by last Easter yet, yesterday, health department officials told Senate estimates only 355 out of 22,000 people living in disability accommodation had received both doses of vaccine. Why has the government only vaccinated less than two per cent of people living in disability accommodation? Why is the Prime Minister so negligent on the vaccine rollout? 14:33 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for his question. I will ask the Minister representing the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme to add to the answer. I refer the member again to the updated figures I have just provided regarding the provision of both first and second doses. What is important we understand is that the health minister has advised on numerous occasions a first dose is a very important protection. It's a very important protection, and I don't think it is helpful for the Labor Party to be talking down first dose protections in the middle of a vaccine program. I don't think it's responsible. I don't think it's supportive of the national effort but it's not surprising to me that that is the way the Labor Party would seek to act as we have seen them act now over these last 18 months. We on this side will continue to focus on the job of rolling out what is the largest vaccine program in Australia's history. We have gone through a week which has seen more than 700,000 Australians being vaccinated around the country. I will ask the minister to add further to the answer. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Ballarat. The member for Maribyrnong was about to take a point of order, but the Prime Minister's now asked the minister representing the minister for the NDIS to conclude the answer. The minister has the call. 14:35 Mr ROBERT HWT Fadden As the Prime Minister has already said, of the 27,000 Australians with a disability in residential settings, which are shared disability accommodation and residential aged care, there have been more than 10,000 doses and more than 7,000 people have been vaccinated—that is, around 25 per cent of people in residential care have been vaccinated as at 29 May this year. This week alone the Commonwealth in-reach vaccination service will visit 83 disability residential accommodation sites in Victoria to vaccinate vulnerable Australians. The first of the specialist disability vaccination hubs in Thomastown was established last week and it's vaccinating more than 120 people a day as part of that. As part of the broader NDIS population aged 16 and over, 35,000 participants have been vaccinated as at 29 May this year. At the commencement of the pandemic, the Morrison government acted swiftly to ensure the safety of participants and the viability of the sector, and we'll continue to do that. The numbers speak for themselves: 183 Australians with disability have contracted COVID-19, a third of the percentage of the general population, even though, as a proportion, their disability and the issues in their life are so much greater. This shows what the strength of the government's response to the sector has been, and we'll continue to prioritise this is as we move forward. COVID-19 51 14:37 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Will the minister please outline to the House the global status of the coronavirus pandemic and how Australia's response is helping protect Australians and strengthen our economic recovery? 14:37 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I want to thank the member for North Sydney, particularly in his role as chair of the House of Representatives Committee on Health and Ageing. We know that the pandemic has spread during the course of this year at a faster rate than it did last year, with 446,000 cases in the last 24 hours and over 10,000 lives lost globally. In particular, we know there have been over 88 million cases this year, and the world has very sadly just passed 1¾ million lives lost in the year to date. What that means is that in the year to date, in just over five months, we have seen more people lose their lives to COVID in 2021 than in the entire course of 2020. By comparison, Australia, through the very clear process of the rings of containment that were put in place—borders, testing, tracing, distancing and the vaccination program—has seen no people who have caught COVID in Australia this year losing their lives. We have had the death of one person who contracted it overseas. It incubated and emerged during the course of the person's quarantine period. Against that comparison for the year to date of 1¾ million lives lost globally during the course of the year and none lost here, thankfully, although we are on watch every day, it is very important to understand what that has meant. It has meant that Australians have overwhelmingly been able to live with far greater degrees of freedom. We know that Victoria right now has an enormous challenge, and today will have been a deeply distressing day for so many Victorians. But as a country, as a nation, what we've been able to achieve is we have protected Australians and kept Australians safe on a scale that compares with the rest of the world in a way in which, when the rest of the world looks at us, it overwhelmingly says, 'We wish we were in Australia's position.' We are a country which, in a world of 88 million cases this year and 1¾ million lives lost to this point, has had no person catch COVID-19 in Australia and pass from COVID-19 this year. But that may not always be the case. The challenge is real, the threat is extant and so we are deeply engaged in the vaccine rollout program, as the Prime Minister said. We had a record day, in the last 24 hours, with 133,000 vaccinations. That takes us to approximately 4.5 million vaccinations so far. In the last two days alone, we've had a record two-day figure of 252,000. So Australians are stepping forward. We've been protecting Australians and we'll continue to protect Australians. COVID-19: Quarantine 52 14:40 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister, who has had the Halton report since October last year. That's eight long months in the life of this eight-year-old government. Today Jane Halton said the government should—to quote her—'be getting on with expanded national quarantine centres as a priority'. With 21 breaches of the hotel quarantine system, why does the Prime Minister still say that building a safe national quarantine system is not a race? 14:40 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook First of all, the quote that the Leader of the Opposition suggested then is just completely false. I've never said that about quarantine facilities at all. I've not said that. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on both sides! Mr MORRISON E3L The Leader of the Opposition comes to the dispatch box and basically tells complete untruths and misrepresents what I have said. I have never referred to quarantine facilities in that context at all. I haven't said that at all. That goes to the character of the Leader of the Opposition and it goes to the way he comes to this dispatch box and puts these issues in the public domain. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order? Mr Albanese R36 Yes, Mr Speaker, on relevance. It's a very clear question about why this Prime Minister has not responded to the Halton report in eight long months, which recommended advancing a— The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. It is not an opportunity to restate the question. The Prime Minister is entitled to respond to the subject matter in the question, as he has done, and I think he is doing that with the last part of the question. Obviously, he is entitled to do that. It was a long question, taking the full 30 seconds. So he is certainly in order at this point. Mr MORRISON E3L The recommendations of the Halton report said the following: The Australian Government should consider a national facility— 'a' national facility— for quarantine to be used for emergency situations, emergency evacuations or urgent scalability. The government has adopted this recommendation and implemented it—at Howard Springs with a 2,000 bed facility at a cost of a half a billion dollars. That 2,000 capability is available now in the Northern Territory. It is available now, despite the assertions made by the Leader of the Opposition to misrepresent the facts when it comes to these issues. The recommendations of the Halton report have been fully adopted by the government and implemented. And now we are going further. In receipt of the proposal by the Victorian government— Mr Hill interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Bruce will leave under 94(a). The member for Bruce then left the chamber. Mr MORRISON E3L we are very close to coming to a position which will enable us to go forward with that facility. I'll be speaking further to the Victorian Acting Premier this evening, as is part of a regular dialogue we have dealing with the many issues that are being addressed in Victoria at the moment—and we're moving forward on that issue as well. The Labor Party and the Leader of the Opposition are engaged in a daily exercise of undermining the pandemic response of this government. This has been their approach all the way through this pandemic. This is a Labor Party and a Leader of the Opposition that Australia can't rely on. An opposition member interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG I can't take another point of order on relevance, but I was about to say to the Prime Minister that, while he was entitled at the start to respond to what was a direct accusation in the question, and I allowed him to do that, he now needs to remain relevant to the question. If he wishes to give a character assessment of those opposite there are many ways he can do that but not in answer to this question. The Prime Minister has concluded. I call the member for Boothby. Defence 53 14:44 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby My question is to the Minister for Defence. Will the minister please outline to the House how the Morrison government's defence cooperation with allies and partners is setting the foundation for our continued economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 14:45 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for her question and greatly appreciate her support of our Defence Force personnel. Every Australian would be proud of the work that is about to get underway in Exercise Talisman Sabre, predominantly in Queensland, where we'll see 1,800 troops travel to our country for the exercise, not only from the United States but also from Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. This will be a very significant effort, for us to work very closely with our partners. This government has put $270 billion into defence capability over this decade, and we know that Labor withdrew $18 billion from the Defence Force when they were last in government because they lost control of their borders and they needed to put that money into that policy failure. I'm asked about alternative policies. As the Australian public knows of this Leader of the Opposition, right through the course of the way in which we have responded to the COVID pandemic—and I'm asked about the economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic—this individual, this Leader of the Opposition, has sought to undermine our standing as a country from day one when it comes to the vaccine rollout— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Minister for Defence will resume his seat. I'd like to invite the Leader of the Opposition to resume his seat at this point and point out, as I did in the last few question times, that, when ministers are asked about alternative approaches, that really is a way in the standing orders to talk about alternative policies. In fact, the standing orders make clear that questions cannot ask directly about opposition policies, which is why that tag phrase has existed for a very long time. But I have tightened up on it. Just because you were asked about alternative approaches does not mean that you can embark on a character assessment. You're going to need to actually find an alternative policy approach that you can refer to that's relevant to the question that's been asked. I'd just say it's not curtailing debate. There are other forums of the House for exactly the sort of approach the minister was taking, and they're very open to him, but it's just not open in question time if it's not relevant to the question. Mr DUTTON 00AKI Funny you should say that, Mr Speaker; I'm just coming to the Labor policy right now. Their policy in relation to defence, as we've seen on display by the Leader of the Opposition today, is not in our national interest—is not in our national interest. At a time when our partners are coming together, at a time when our partners understand the intelligence and the threats within our region, the Leader of the Opposition is out there seeking to undermine the position— The SPEAKER 00APG No. I'd just say to the minister he has to— Mr DUTTON 00AKI of this country, Mr Speaker. That is the Labor policy. The SPEAKER 00APG No, he has to actually— Mr DUTTON 00AKI That is the Labor policy. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG No, the minister will not argue with me. Members on my left, particularly those behind the front bench, you're assisting no-one. The minister's asked if there are alternative approaches. He needs to say what they are, not say what they are and say what the consequences are. The minister has the call. If you're asked about alternative approaches or policies, you've at least got to say what they are. I don't think that's an overly stringent requirement. Mr DUTTON 00AKI Mr Speaker, just to put it into— Mr Husic interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Chifley will leave under 94(a). The member for Chifley then left the chamber. Mr DUTTON 00AKI To put it into clear words, Mr Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is enunciating a policy of the Labor Party at the moment, which is an alternative policy, in contrast to the government's policy—that is, we are standing up for our country's interests— Opposition members interjecting— Mr DUTTON 00AKI You are not. No, the Labor Party, Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER 00APG No, the Minister for Defence— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG No, the Minister for Defence—members on my left! Mr DUTTON 00AKI Mr Speaker, the government at the moment— The SPEAKER 00APG I've asked the minister to pause yet a second time. I think I've made my ruling clear. If the minister wants to say what he's saying, he can't do it in response to this question. And we can do this long way or the short way, but he really can't. Let me be really clear about it. If he wants to launch the sort of character attack he's doing—I have tightened up on this and I've made it very clear. Other ministers have given very robust answers by saying: 'This is the alternative approach. This is the alternative policy.' If he wants to go down the path he's going, he really has to use another form of the House, like a suspension. The minister has the call. Mr DUTTON 00AKI Thank you, Mr Speaker. I understand your ruling. I've been very clear about the government's position and our policy, and that is one of consistency in relation to the support of our defence forces. We have put money into the Australian Defence Force at an unprecedented level. We have put $270 billion in over the course of this decade. We are realistic about the threats that our country faces. And this government isn't saying one thing to one group and then completely the opposite to the next group. That is the contrast between this side and that side of parliament. (Time expired) COVID-19: Quarantine 54 14:50 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that the Business Council of Australia chief said on the weekend, 'Victorians are being plunged into despair and disbelief again by a failure to get the basics right, including our quarantine system'? Australia's businesses know a safe national quarantine system will better protect them, so why won't the Prime Minister just do his job and deliver it? 14:51 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders In relation to the shadow minister's question, the first thing is that, when we look at the comparison with the rest of the world which I outlined previously, what it shows is that, of all the countries in the world, at a time when we are seeing outbreaks in Thailand, Singapore, South Korea and Japan and in the jurisdiction of Taiwan— Mr Perrett interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Moreton will leave under 94(a). The member for Moreton then left the chamber. Mr HUNT 00AMV We see that the situation in Australia is vastly different. The most fundamental of all the protections is the quarantine system, but it was always the first line and not the last line of defence—the first ring of containment, where others are in place. That's been recognised right throughout—borders, testing, tracing, distancing and vaccination. As the Prime Minister has said, well over 300,000 Australians have come back through hotel quarantine, and it has been 99.99 per cent effective. We know that any country that engages with the rest of the world is at risk of incursions. No country has an immunity, but no country is, perhaps, better protected than Australia. Having said that, there are very clear hotel quarantine guidelines that have been put in place and have protected Australia. Firstly, we have the decision of the national cabinet on 27 March 2020, which also included the Australian Defence Force beginning to assist state and territory governments to undertake quarantine compliance. But there has been ongoing work. Reference has been made to the Halton review, and on 23 October national cabinet accepted the review's recommendations. On 24 December, very importantly, the medical expert panel, the AHPPC, agreed on the ongoing national principles for hotel quarantine and noted that, as state and territory governments manage hotel quarantine, many of these recommendations are implemented locally. They had that role and they had that responsibility, and they have overwhelmingly been doing it to the highest of standards. The Commonwealth has put in place, in line with the recommendation of the Halton review, the Centre for National Resilience at Howard Springs. That has now been adopted by the Northern Territory as its responsibility. We have seen its expansion in capacity. I would note that flights have come in on 23, 24, 25 and 31 May, and on the current intended schedule we have flights which, subject to final confirmation, are expected on 10, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24 and 30 June. These are the people who are coming in to be cared for, protected and quarantined in Australia. Indeed, they make up the very numbers to which the Leader of the Opposition was referring. (Time expired) National Security 55 14:54 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Will the minister update the House about how the Morrison government's actions to strengthen our border protection are setting the foundation for our continued economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic by creating a safer and more secure Australia, and is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 14:55 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I thank the member for his question and for his very strong interest in national security. Our government makes absolutely no apologies for doing what needs to be done to keep Australians safe and secure, and the security of our borders and the safety of our families and our businesses are absolutely critical to our continued economic recovery. We were swift to act at the start of the pandemic, and it's widely recognised that our international border controls have played a major role in Australia's successful containment of the virus. As the Prime Minister has said, our international borders will only open when it's safe to do so. But I want to assure the Australian people we are carefully planning for the future and working on ways to facilitate a safe reopening based on medical advice and our capacity to manage increased arrivals. We know that border restrictions that have been necessary during the pandemic have had a significant impact on many Australians, particularly those who are wanting to be reunited with loved ones, but strong borders are essential at this time, and, of course, the coalition government has a strong track record on border security. One of the first things that I did when I was sworn in as the Minister for Home Affairs was send a very clear message that our government remains absolutely determined when it comes to border policy so that people smugglers don't think they can start back up their evil trade. Secure borders are now more important than ever, and the risk of uncontrolled arrivals to our shores at this time is more significant than ever before. Through Operation Sovereign Borders, which we are continuing to fund through the budget, we have achieved what others said was impossible. Next month it will be seven years since the last successful people-smuggling venture reached our shores. Turnbacks continue to work, with 873 people from 38 people-smuggling boats returned to their country of departure or to their home country. It is a matter of fact that more than 1,200 people drowned at sea and more than 50,000 people arrived illegally in Australia under the Labor government, and this government will never allow that to happen. Our government remains absolutely laser focused on the national interest, on protecting our sovereignty and on keeping the Australian community safe. COVID-19: Victoria 55 14:58 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio My question is to the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister understand that today Victorians are dealing with the impacts of an extended lockdown, including the closure of schools, disruption to small businesses without JobKeeper, concern about vulnerable loved ones in aged care and ongoing mental health impacts? Prime Minister, wouldn't this have been avoided if, instead of insisting it's not a race, you'd simply done your job? Why should Victorians be punished for your negligence? 14:58 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I have greater faith in the people of Victoria than what has been suggested by the assertions from the member. Australians understand, whether they're in Victoria or anywhere else, that we are combatting a virus that is insidious, and they know— Mr Khalil interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Wills will leave under standing order 94(a). The member for Wills then left the chamber. The SPEAKER 00APG I again just remind people of what will automatically happen if they continue to interject in the way they have been. Mr MORRISON E3L They understand that the job of our government has been to do two things: to save lives and to save livelihoods. In this country— An opposition member interjecting— Mr MORRISON E3L I note the interjection, which was, 'When is that going to start?' It may have escaped the member that, in this country, had we had the same death rate from COVID as the average of the OECD, more than 30,000 people would have lost their lives. Here in this country, that is not what occurred. That is not what occurred here in this country. In addition to that, it has been our job to save livelihoods as well. As the national accounts demonstrate today and as the national employment figures demonstrate today, there are more people in work today than there were before the pandemic, and our economy is bigger today than it was before the pandemic began. Those opposite, the Labor Party, may seek to undermine the government's efforts and talk down Australia, but what I know is that Victorians will face this challenge. They'll face it with the same strength and the same resilience as all Australians have all around this country. This government will continue to provide support, as we have in the past and as we continue to do even now. Emergency cash assistance, pandemic leave payments, the JobSeeker payments, the relaxation of the work activity test, and the income arrangements that apply to these payments and waiting lists are all being provided. I'll be speaking again today to the Acting Premier, and the Treasurer will also be speaking to the Treasurer in Victoria. Those opposite may want to use the pandemic for their political purposes. We'll keep doing our job—saving Australian lives and saving Australian livelihoods. Energy 56 15:01 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. Will the minister outline to the House how the decisive action the Morrison government is taking to boost our fuel security is helping to set the foundation for our continued economic recovery from COVID-19 by ensuring Australians have access to the affordable, reliable and secure energy we rely on? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 15:01 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I thank the member for O'Connor for his question. As a proud farmer and regional member, he knows the importance of energy security for keeping the economy moving in his electorate and right across Australia. He knows that the truckies, the tradies, the farmers and the miners in places like Collie and the Goldfields absolutely rely on energy security and liquid fuel security to be able to do their jobs every day. While Australia's fuel supplies have remained secure and affordable throughout the pandemic, we need to be vigilant in the event of the worst-case scenarios that might come upon us. Our fuel security package is focused on dealing with exactly that. It has a number of components. The first is a minimum stock obligation, which will require a 40 per cent increase in diesel stock holdings onshore here in Australia. We're investing, of course, in onshore diesel storage to make sure that there are storages there for that additional diesel holding. But we've also locked in the future of our refineries—the refinery in Geelong and the refinery in Brisbane. Those refineries are not just secured for the future; they're secured for investment to make our fuel cleaner. That's all part of the package— Mr Thistlethwaite interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Kingsford Smith will leave under 94(a). Mr TAYLOR 231027 That will ensure that we have the sovereign capability, the self-sufficiency, when we really need it. That builds on the broader work we're doing on energy security right across the country to make sure we have the supplies of generation-of-electricity energy when we really need it. We're ensuring that Australians have what they need. I was asked about alternative approaches. There are at least two. On the one hand, there's the member for Hunter and his Otis group mates. On the other hand, there's a group the member for Hunter has called the 'excessive progressives'— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister had better come quickly to what the alternative is, not give us another clip that he's read in the newspaper. He's got to come to what the alternative is. Mr TAYLOR 231027 It's a very important question: what are the policies of the 'excessive progressives', who we are told are on the march? We know they are against natural gas. We know they're against jobs in the Hunter Valley. The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order? Mr Albanese R36 Yes, Mr Speaker, on relevance. If he wants to talk about alternatives, he can talk about the two refineries that have shut on his watch—two out of four. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The minister has the call. That is not a valid point of order. Mr TAYLOR 231027 I'm not going to talk about Clyde and Kurnell, which closed when the Leader of the Opposition was the transport minister, but I will talk about the policies of those opposite, including shutting down jobs in the Hunter Valley, opposing clean technology jobs through reforms of ARENA and opposing additional investment in ARENA. We're getting on with the job of energy security and fuel security. Those opposite are opposing us. (Time expired) COVID-19: Victoria 57 15:05 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister, and I ask: does the Prime Minister take any responsibility for the ongoing lockdown in Victoria? 15:05 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook As the Leader of the Opposition would be fully aware, the decisions to implement lockdowns in states and territories around the country are solely and totally the responsibility of state and territory governments—solely and totally. The Commonwealth government is not part of that decision-making process. They are made by state governments—in this case, the Victorian state government. But, despite that, the Commonwealth government seeks to work closely with the state government, as we have been doing, particularly in relation to the extension of further support through the ADF to support the measures that they have requested, and I am having further discussions with the Acting Premier this evening, as the Treasurer is having with the Treasurer in Victoria. But lockdowns in states are decisions of state and territory governments. That is a responsibility that the states and territories have jealously guarded over the course of the pandemic. That is their responsibility, and they are making those decisions and taking those responsibilities. Mining Industry: Minerals 57 15:06 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper My question is to the Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia. Will the minister inform the House about how the Morrison-McCormack government's actions in securing our strong mineral export markets are setting the foundation for our continued economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic by creating a safer and more secure Australia? And is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 15:07 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler Can I thank the honourable member for their question. It's Minerals Week, and we need to be out there supporting our hardworking men and women in the resources sector, and I'm sure the member for Cowper does. But why is the minerals sector so important to the member's electorate and so important to all Australians? How is it that it makes a safer and more secure Australia? Well, the reality is pretty straightforward. In the world of changing technology, as we continue to look at electrification, and whether it's in defence, new medical applications, smart tech or communications, it is Australia's resources sector that is providing that feedstock. Critical minerals, or rare earths, are actually used in defence assets. An F-35 fighter, for example, contains 417 kilos of rare earths, used in targeting, communications and other systems. A destroyer has nearly 2½ tonnes of rare earths. A submarine might have more than four tonnes of rare earths. A smart phone—I'm sure there's a lot of people in here who use a smart phone—has more than 40 different mined minerals and more than 20 to 40 grams of cobalt. So the minerals sector is important for all Australians. It is important that we have a strong sector in the resources sector. It's important that we continue to look for opportunities, particularly for downstream processing. The Minerals Council has put out a forecast on the increase in demand in the minerals sector, and we expect: things like aluminium, for example, in terms of a processed product, to be up by 45 per cent by 2030; the global demand for nickel to rise by 67 per cent; and, of course, iron ore and all of our other staples to remain strong and continue to employ Australians right across the board—some 260,000 individuals. We are intending to ensure that that pipeline continues and that we continue to have that employment opportunity. Twenty million dollars in the budget is committed to the Global Resources Strategy and over $200 million for exploring for the future, to ensure we do have that pipeline of new projects and new mines coming on. We intend to ensure—and we have done, through the JMEI, the Junior Minerals Exploration Incentive, a tax incentive—that we are out there, working hard in those regional areas, delivering new opportunities for mines and miners. But I'm asked about alternatives—and we saw an alternative from those opposite reported today, on their approach to the resources sector. That particular project is likely to deliver some 6,000 jobs into the Northern Territory over the next 20 years. How do those opposite approach it? They have to put it to a vote in their caucus to decide if they support the resources sector. We stand up for our sector unequivocally. We know that projects like those in Narrabri, like those in the Barossa and like those in Scarborough don't need to be put to a vote. We support them 100 per cent. (Time expired) Mr Morrison E3L I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. MOTIONS 58 MOTIONS Prime Minister 58 15:10 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes: (a) the Australian Government is responsible for the funding and regulation of aged care; (b) more than one third of aged care residents are yet to be fully vaccinated with two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine; (c) the Government does not know how many residential aged care staff have been vaccinated against COVID-19; (d) the Aged Care Minister says he's comfortable with the pace of the vaccine rollout and the Prime Minister says vaccinating Australians is not a race; (e) the states have now been forced to step in to fix the Prime Minister's bungled vaccine rollout in aged care and disability care; (f) the Constitution provides the Australian Government is responsible for quarantine; and (g) despite the fact there have been 21 breaches of hotel quarantine, and the Prime Minister has had the Halton report since October last year, the Prime Minister has failed to establish a safe, national quarantine system; and (2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to urgently fix his bungled vaccine rollout and establish a safe, national quarantine system. Leave not granted. Mr ALBANESE R36 I move: That so much of standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition from moving the following motion immediately: That the House: (1) notes: (a) the Australian Government is responsible for the funding and regulation of aged care; (b) more than one third of aged care residents are yet to be fully vaccinated with two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine; (c) the Government does not know how many residential aged care staff have been vaccinated against COVID-19; (d) the Aged Care Minister says he's comfortable with the pace of the vaccine rollout and the Prime Minister says vaccinating Australians is not a race; (e) the states have now been forced to step in to fix the Prime Minister's bungled vaccine rollout in aged care and disability care; (f) the Constitution provides the Australian Government is responsible for quarantine; and (g) despite the fact there have been 21 breaches of hotel quarantine, and the Prime Minister has had the Halton report since October last year, the Prime Minister has failed to establish a safe, national quarantine system; and (2) therefore, calls on the Prime Minister to urgently fix his bungled vaccine rollout and establish a safe, national quarantine system. This Prime Minister won't accept responsibility for anything. He said he doesn't hold a— 15:13 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the Leader of the Opposition be no further heard.

The House divided. [15:18]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

68 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Brien, T O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 58 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Jones, SP Kearney, G King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

15:20 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 15:20 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio Seconded. Victoria's in lockdown because this Prime Minister is incompetent and negligent. 15:21 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition be no further heard.

The House divided. [15:22]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

67 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 58 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Jones, SP Kearney, G King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

15:23 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition be disagreed to. Leader of the House, I need to point out that, to move the motion that he wants to move, I at least need to hear something. The Deputy Manager of Opposition Business has the call. 15:23 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh Two jobs: vaccines and quarantine, and he's failed at both. 15:23 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That the motion be put. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the motion be put.

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

68 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 58 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Jones, SP Kearney, G King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

15:25 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the honourable Leader of the Opposition be disagreed to.

The House divided. [15:27]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

68 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Chester, D Christensen, GR Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Frydenberg, JA Gee, AR Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Hunt, GA Irons, SJ Joyce, BT Kelly, C Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Ley, SP Littleproud, D Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McCormack, MF McIntosh, MI Morrison, SJ Morton, B O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Sukkar, MS Taylor, AJ Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Vasta, RX Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 59 NOES Albanese, AN Aly, A Bandt, AP Bird, SL Bowen, CE Burke, AS Burney, LJ Burns, J Butler, MC Butler, TM Byrne, AM Chalmers, JE Clare, JD Claydon, SC Coker, EA Collins, JM Conroy, PM Dick, MD Dreyfus, MA Elliot, MJ Fitzgibbon, JA Georganas, S Giles, AJ Gorman, P Gosling, LJ Haines, H Hayes, CP Jones, SP Kearney, G King, CF King, MMH Leigh, AK Marles, RD McBain, KL McBride, EM Mitchell, BK Murphy, PJ Neumann, SK O'Connor, BPJ Owens, JA Payne, AE Phillips, FE Plibersek, TJ Rishworth, AL Rowland, MA Ryan, JC (teller) Sharkie, RCC Shorten, WR Smith, DPB Snowdon, WE Stanley, AM (teller) Steggall, Z Swanson, MJ Templeman, SR Watts, TG Wells, AS Wilkie, AD Wilson, JH Zappia, A 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS 63 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS COVID-19: Vaccination 63 15:28 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I am very pleased to add to an earlier answer. I have been advised very recently by the Vaccine Operations Centre that they have upgraded by 5,000 the number of Australians vaccinated in the last 24 hours. Instead of 133,000, it is 138,705, a record number. AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS 63 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS Report No. 40 of 2020-21 63 15:28 The SPEAKER 00APG I present the Auditor-General's financial statements Audit report No. 40 of 2020-21 entitled Interim report on key financial controls of major entities. Document made a parliamentary paper in accordance with the resolution agreed to on 28 March 2018. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 63 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Health Care 63 15:29 The SPEAKER 00APG I have received a letter from the honourable member for Indi proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The urgent need to respond to the public health challenges facing the nation. I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:29 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi As a Victorian, it was with a heavy heart that I watched the press conference this morning from the Victorian government, knowing the anguish and difficulty this press conference would bring and the devastation felt by communities right across our great state. It's possible that from 11.59 pm tomorrow night these restrictions may apply a little differently in regional Victoria. It's a tense time, and I thank the Deputy Premier for taking into account that the conditions in regional Victoria are somewhat different to those affecting our friends and family in metropolitan Melbourne, and I say that with the greatest respect to everyone in Melbourne. It's important that we don't apply broad brushstrokes indiscriminately. It's really important that we make sure in regional Australia and regional Victoria that we take into account the particular circumstances that regional Victorians, and regional Australians more broadly, have. Again, I say that with the greatest respect and compassion for metropolitan Melbourne. This is important because many of my constituents will, should the restrictions change, be able to return to work. Many people have already lost a week of wages. To lose two would be devastating. Businesses are exposed, casual workers are exposed, school kids are home from school and there's no federal safety net anymore for any of these workers. So, as the constituents in my electorate may be able to return to work, I'm conscious that the workers of Melbourne will not. This afternoon during question time we had the federal Treasurer boasting about the economic recovery. Of course, we are all pleased about an economic recovery. But to boast about our position in the world and not be providing some form of support to the workers of Victoria during what is now an extended lockdown, is, I think, highly, highly problematic. Because what is a lockdown in Victoria now will surely be, inevitably, a lockdown somewhere else during this long pandemic crisis. Because that's what it is. This virulent strain of COVID-19, with its many variants and now its very dangerous variant, will continue to escape from hotel quarantine. That's inevitable. We know it will. To boast in question time but not have a plan about how we'll respond, community by community, as they're affected by this ongoing public health crisis, is really concerning to me. Because this isn't a game. This isn't about passing the political football. This is about real people: people who have to pay the rent and people who have to put food on the table and petrol in the car. They have to buy medicines. Casual workers are exposed and businesses are frightened and uncertain. We've talked a lot about a race in this parliament this week and, frankly, I'm sick of talking about races. This is an Olympic year. In a normal year we may be talking about a race. But, honestly, this is a nation which has had a proud history of public health response, and, right now, when it comes to vaccination, if this were the Olympics we would be right at the bottom of the medal tally. That is really, really disappointing, because access to vaccination is problematic, and it is problematic in my community. Just this morning, I had a constituent absolutely irate that in his little community, a tiny village called Yackandandah, there's no ability for him to get a vaccine. He's unable to get to the vaccination hub in Wodonga, and, even if he could, he actually would be turned away right now, because those poor health workers in Wodonga are trying to catch up on the 1a and 1b vaccination priorities that should have been done months ago. Many of our GPs are not vaccinating. One of them rang me this week to say she would love her clinic in Beechworth to be vaccinating. But, quite frankly, her frontline staff are exhausted and burnt out, and they're burnt out from the numerous phone calls they're getting from confused and worried people in the community—people who are wondering how they can get this vaccine now that the urgency dial has been turned up so acutely. It seems to me that none of this appears to have been predicted, that this surge requirement was not predicted. I find that extraordinary. Surely it was predictable, knowing what was going on around the world and knowing that, inevitably, this virus would escape from our hotel quarantine. This go-slow attitude is really having consequences now, and I say to the nation, wherever you are: Think about this. Think about this very, very carefully, because what's happening in Victoria can happen anywhere now. We know that. Our vaccine hubs in Victoria are turning away people right now because there is simply not the capacity to vaccinate the number of people who are coming forward. In regional Victoria—indeed, in regional Australia—if everyone was vaccinated by now we could feel a little more reassured, but we're not. The mayor of Indigo Shire contacted me during the week. She told me that the stand-up vaccine hubs that are planned for her community won't be there until July. That's a long time to wait. She's really worried. So I do say: please let this be a lesson to the rest of the nation, particularly in rural and regional Australia, to get those vaccination hubs working in a way that works for little communities as well as big ones. So, yes, the government needs to ramp up the vaccination program. It needs to ramp it up fast. It's a folly, a total folly, that we haven't done this until now. I'm really tired of hearing both sides talk about the politics of this. What we need now is a prime minister—and a government—who stops talking about politics and really acts and listens to many of our GPs in particular and to those health services in our smaller communities. Albury Wodonga Health run the vaccination program in the top end of my electorate, and they are an extraordinary health service. There are an incredible team doing an incredible job, but they have a limited workforce. They did before the beginning of this pandemic. They haven't got any more workforce; they're doing additional work. They are in fact the busiest regional health service outside of Geelong in Victoria—incredible, really—and they have highly inadequate facilities in their hospital, which is seeing demand in their ED greater than they've seen in many, many years. They're crucial to our response. They need urgent capital works. Our region in the northern end of the electorate needs a world-class single-site regional hospital on the border. If ever we knew that, we know that now, and I really call on the government to get behind Albury Wodonga Health and put in capital funding to get that single-site hospital. It's a clear message from Albury Wodonga Health. By 2040 that hospital will have to handle 150,000 emergency presentations, 40,000 surgeries and 1,900 births every year, and we could still be in a pandemic—who knows? That's the thing, we don't know and we need to be ready and we need to predict. That surge capacity needs to be able to be brought on board when we face public health emergencies such as what we've got. We need to make sure in this public health crisis that we're facing that rural and regional Australia is not left behind, that we have the facilities, that we have the workforce and that we have the capacity to surge when we need to in order to meet the challenges that are quite unique to small places. In the last week I've met with Christine Morgan, the CEO of the National Mental Health Commission, and Professor Ruth Stewart, the National Rural Health Commissioner. We all talked about similar things. We talked about the absolutely crucial need to make sure that with our rural health services we are not trying to fit a metro model into a rural context. It's important that we look at the whole workforce and that we look at practitioners such as nurse practitioners, who right now are not able to participate fully in the vaccination program, because they're not covered by Medicare. That's a lost opportunity, and one we could fix. We truly could. I'm looking right now at the minister for regional health, the member for Parkes. Minister, the report of the multipurpose services program is still sitting on the government's desk. In that report are key elements that could really improve our capacity to deliver high-quality aged care in rural and remote situations. Multipurpose services was a key finding of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, and I'd love to work with you on that and make it a reality. These rural health services are crucial to this pandemic response. I call on the government to do everything they can to protect rural and regional Australians. 15:39 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes I can relate to the member's anxiety and frustration at this time, as someone who has a border community myself. In some ways, there are added complications and issues when there's a lockdown like we've got in Victoria. I might comment on where the member finished. I also am a fan of the multipurpose services. In the little town where I live, the multipurpose service is provided by a dedicated staff and two very dedicated doctors. They provide a wonderful service, not only aged care but emergency services as well. What tends to happen in this place—and I suppose it's only natural—is that the conversations focus on where things mightn't be quite happening as they should, and the great work that has been going on doesn't get recognised. The member for Indi mentioned GPs and how they're tired and overworked. But we should give credit to the over 4,000 GPs who have stood up and taken on the responsibility. I've visited quite a few of those around the countryside in the last couple of months. Indeed, my wife and I are having our AstraZeneca shots at four o'clock on Saturday afternoon at a GP clinic that's working extra hours to make sure that they're keeping their community covered. We need to be careful in this place. I think the breakout of a number of COVID cases in Victoria and the subsequent lockdown have probably been a bit of a wake-up call for the rest of the country. Because of our success, we did have a level of complacency. For a period of time, we did have vaccines that were sitting in vaccine fridges in clinics and GP services around the country and were not being taken up at the rate that they are now. That has turned around. The member mentioned that in her comment. We're now finding that people are really taking the opportunities when they come up. Just as an indication of how this is ramping up: the first million doses took 47 days to deliver, the second million took 19 days, the third million took 17 days and the fourth million took 13 days. That will continue to escalate as more vaccines become available to the public and as we broaden out the number of ways and the number of locations for people across Australia to go and obtain vaccines. Last week in Queensland the community pharmacies signed up to deliver doses across some of those country areas where there might not be GP services. I know state health departments are doing the same. The member's matter of public importance is 'the urgent need to respond to the public health challenges facing the nation'. We shouldn't forget the response at the start of this COVID pandemic that led Australia to be one of the safest countries in the world. We shouldn't forget that the telehealth program was brought in in a matter of days—10 days—and we still are using that telehealth system. We've had, I think, 60 million telehealth calls, so people have been able to get the advice and the medications they need and have been kept relatively safe. The reason that Australia has done so well is not a fluke. It has done so well because of the policies that have been put in place. More importantly, it has done so well because the Australian people have stood up and taken the advice they were given and, as a result, we are in a very enviable position. The member spoke about the need for a broader approach, a multidisciplinary approach, across regional Australia, and I agree with her. The government has recognised that need. We've funded some trial sites around the regional areas, looking at building a multidisciplinary team. She mentioned the Rural Health Commissioner. We've actually also contracted two deputy health commissioners, one with experience in allied health. The first Indigenous pharmacist in Australia is now a deputy rural health commissioner. The other deputy rural health commissioner has extensive experience in nursing. We contracted these deputies so that we can look at broadening that team approach. But we shouldn't forget that, across the regions with our Stronger Rural Health Strategy, already over 700 extra doctors have gone into regional Australia along with a similar number of nurses. In the budget we changed the rural bulk-billing incentive, so that those doctors that go to work in regional Australia are remunerated for the fact they are more likely to have to bulk-bill in communities that don't have high levels of income. We've recognised that process. Last Friday I was with the Deputy Prime Minister to announce that the Royal Flying Doctor Service will be servicing 30,000 people across rural and remote Australia and the issue of hesitancy from the fears that people have in some of those smaller communities will be largely alleviated because the Royal Flying Doctor Service is such a respected organisation. If they give advice to a community that this vaccine is the right thing to do, that community will take it up. The success story—some might even say the miracle—of the COVID-19 pandemic is that we've managed to keep it out of those remote communities, where the level of chronic ill health and the lack of intensive care beds would've been an absolute disaster should COVID have come into play. With reference to measures around COVID-19, the government has expended $1.7 billion to extend the health response package and another $1.9 billion for the vaccine purchase and rollout. The rollout is growing exponentially. I think we in this place have a responsibility to the press because a lot of the fear that has been generated around the vaccine rollout has been from debates that have happened in this place. I'll take up some of the points the member raised. We need to have a united voice because the science is in, and having the vaccine to protect us against COVID is the best way to protect ourselves as individuals and to protect our families. It's also the best way to protect our communities. A number of articles that we're seeing that are generating uncertainty and fear and some of the contributions that are made in this place, I think, have led to that uncertainty. I believe that, with what's happening in Victoria and the lockdown that is having such a devastating effect on that community, that might be the catalyst that will see Australians step up and take the opportunity to have the vaccine when it arrives. This government understands the importance of protecting Australians. We acted quickly at the start of the pandemic. As a result, we have a record that is enviable around the world. There's more to do. We can all play our part in this. We're putting in the resources and the Australian people are putting their shoulders to the wheel to make sure that this country continues to be the safest place on the planet to live. 15:49 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne It dredges up terrible feelings and memories for all of us in Victoria watching and awaiting those press conferences every day, awaiting those figures, to find out today that we are going into an extended lockdown again. We know that we'll get through it because we have done it before but we're angry because we shouldn't have to, because this lockdown follows a series of failures from this government. The virus escaped from a quarantine facility in another state, and quarantine facilities and standards in those facilities are the Prime Minister's responsibility. It came into a population that was unvaccinated, and vaccination is the Prime Minister's responsibility. We saw infections among aged-care workers, and aged care is the federal government's responsibility. That is why this is called the 'Morrison lockdown'. He's leaving us in Victoria high and dry. That is rubbing salt into our wounds and making this lockdown even harder. This time around, we're asked to do our bit for the public health of the country, to stop a third wave from spreading across Australia but without the financial support we had last time. It's happening when businesses, especially in my electorate of Melbourne—in the arts sector, the creative sector, the hospitality sector, the retail sector—were just getting back on their feet, starting to enjoy full houses again and seeing those bookings come through. Casual workers were starting to get shifts coming through again, and people were looking forward to this period as one of rebuilding; instead, it is one that might smash many businesses and many workers during this period. The first time around, JobKeeper was so important because it kept businesses and their workers connected and kept them alive. But despite clear requests, the government is giving us in Victoria nothing. People in Victoria are asking for a hand, and the government is giving us the finger. Even though this lockdown may only go for two weeks, and we hope it does, the consequences can be long lasting because this could be the difference between businesses getting back on their feet or failing. People who don't have a job are in enormous strife because they are living below the poverty line at the moment. Last time around, there was some recognition that costs during a pandemic can go up, because all of a sudden you need to order things that may have been available for you through some other means. Costs for many things go up. Life can become more expensive for many people, especially for those who are amongst the poorest in our community. That's why this time around we need JobKeeper 2.0. We need JobSeeker lifted above the poverty line and, right now, the government needs to listen to the call from ACOSS for an immediate payment of $3,000 for those people who have lost work or, we say, didn't have any in the first place. Bills need to be paid right now. We don't have the same protections that were in place last time, like the protections against evictions. We don't have the same financial supports from the government. But people have lost their shifts. People are already doing it tough. People are already finding it impossible to make ends meet. If there's one lesson from last time, if you want people to follow the public health advice then relieve the financial pressure on them so they can do it and we need to do that right now. The Prime Minister could do that with a stroke of a pen. There was $10 billion put aside to deal with COVID emergencies. Most of that, about $9 billion-plus of it, as far as I'm aware, is still sitting there. That is what it is there for—to help people through the tough times and the urgent times. Spend some of it now to ensure the pandemic doesn't get worse and to ensure people don't fall through the cracks. I mentioned aged care before. One of the things that this pandemic has shown us is the failure of privatisation in aged care. It turns out that running aged care for profit and having your country run by people who take donations from the big corporations that run aged care for profit is an all-round terrible idea. It's time to start making care for the public good, not for profit. We know that what is going to get us through this pandemic we're witnessing are all the things the government has attacked for the last 30 years. It is our public health system that is going to help us get through this pandemic. That is why we have to stop the cuts to our public health system and, instead of giving handouts of billions of dollars to corporations that already have a lot of money, start reinvesting in our public health system. 15:55 Mr JOYCE E5D New England There is no doubt about it: COVID has been an absolute tragedy globally. In excess of 170 million people have caught the disease, and in excess of 3½ million people have died. In the United States, 555,000 people have died. That's basically more than the First World War, the Second World War and the Vietnam and Iraq wars combined. In England, in excess of 120,000 people have died. Each one of those lives is as precious as the other. There is no way to calibrate the worth of a life. But what you can say is that Australia has done very well, on that morbid statistic. Fewer than a thousand people in Australia have died from COVID. That is an exceptional outcome. We hoped it would be zero—Greenland has had zero deaths—and we have to strive towards that. It seems evident that the epicentre of the disease in Australia has been Victoria. Someone has to call into question the management by the state government in Victoria. If the Victorian Labor government are incapable of managing the COVID epidemic, then they should hand it over to somebody who can. There's been a massive expenditure by the government, almost totally on borrowed money, to make sure that we do what we can to alleviate the financial concerns and try to get ourselves to the other end here, but it's not an unlimited cheque book. It just can't go on. This money has to be repaid. What I find an incredible frustration is hearing members from the Greens talk about wanting to spend more money. Then, in the next breath, they're saying we need to ban coal and gas and the live cattle trade. They want us to ban the mechanism that earns the export dollars for this nation. It shows that there is an inconsistency and, some would say, an economic insincerity in their request. They're never able to show you exactly where the money that they want spent comes from. It just becomes an ambit claim. Anyone can make an ambit claim, but it's only the coalition or the Labor Party that have to make the books stack up, that have to work out where this money is going to come from and how our path out of our current debt is going to be achieved. If your benevolence is authentic, you need to stand behind it and be strong enough to say, 'We must also show you where the money we want spent will come from and how we'll make sure our economy becomes as powerful as possible, as quickly as possible, so we can achieve that outcome.' What you also find with the Greens is that, once they get perturbed, frustrated or incompetent in an argument, they just go to an argument ad hominem. There is really no depth or substance to what they say. That's fair enough. You can be a barking oracle in here. It's quite easy, but it doesn't take our nation anywhere. I'm happy that in my electorate of New England we are getting on with the COVID vaccine rollout. We are getting through the population. In Australia, around four million people have received the vaccination, and about one million have received two doses. So the program is rolling ahead. You may say, 'Where is perfection?' I don't know where that resides, but the fact that Australia has managed to control the cataclysmic death toll seen in other countries, I would say, has to be a big tick for the government. I would say that anyone looking around the world would have to say that it's thanks to the grace of the government—and luck—that we do not have the problems being experiencing elsewhere. I would say our government has done an exceptional job, and I'm not known for giving away glib praise just for the sake of it. 16:00 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah In talking about the response to the public health challenges of 2019-20 and 2020-21, we should firstly recognise and say thank you to our health professionals, our frontline professionals, who have in fact kept us safe. It is not the government that has kept us safe; it has been individual citizens who have put their lives on the line to defend and protect communities and keep them safe. Throughout the bushfire crisis of 2019-20, it was all of them out there that were keeping us safe. So, with respect, I always find it very hypocritical when the government is in here beating its chest and the opposition is pounding away, because, at the end of the day, it is the individual Australians who are keeping Australia safe. They are taking the hit for the team. They are the ones who are following health orders or doing what needs to be done. They are closing down their businesses despite knowing there will be serious consequences resulting from that, that their economic outlook will be dire. We have some serious challenges, and it would be such a relief if we could for just a moment in this place hear some long-term planning around those health challenges instead of this short-term, glib, beating of chests and pointing of fingers from side to side that we get nonstop in this place. Australians are desperate to know that this government and this parliament as a whole are focused on the health challenges. Our immediate challenge is COVID and the vaccine rollout. I and my office were getting so much anecdotal evidence from frustrated people who wanted to receive the vaccine but couldn't. I conducted a survey of health practitioners and GPs in my electorate, and the overwhelming feedback was that they were not receiving sufficient supplies to administer the vaccines to those wanting to get it. Seriously! We have shut down the borders. For the last 14 months we have been absolutely 'Bubble Australia' at great personal, economic and emotional cost to many, many Australians. During that 14 months the absolute responsibility on the government was to ensure we had a prompt and efficient rollout of the vaccine. Now, 14 months later, to be getting feedback that people are willing and able and turning up to be vaccinated but are unable to because of a lack of supply is just negligence. This has to be addressed. Overwhelmingly, the message around the need to get vaccinated has been appalling. Again, we have had 14 months to prepare for this. We all came together to put in place emergency measures to ensure the government had space to come up with a response, to come up with a plan. Where is our COVID-19 Coordination Commission? What were they doing, apart from wasting money and focusing on gas follies and self-righteous and self-serving projects? Why were they not planning a very meticulous rollout of this vaccine to ensure that it would happen with the utmost urgency and speed? Bubble Australia cannot continue forever. It is a fool's paradise to think so. Economically, we have to ensure that our businesses can access the workforce they need. We need to ensure that families can have contact. I wrote in August to the minister to ask for the extension of the family exemption to being able to travel to include parents, but I've had no response at all from the government on that. There has been no movement despite it being some 14 months on. We've had a really interesting double standard developing. We hear reports of movie stars that are having no trouble getting their parents in and out of the country to visit them, but Australians who are here who need that support are unable to get that same support. We have serious challenges ahead of us on the health front. We have obesity, which is a rampant problem. I shudder to think of the health consequences that are going to flow from these COVID years, when we think of lockdowns, the mental health consequences and the consequences of lack of activity. We already have a huge obesity problem in this country, and we're simply not addressing it. Then we come to the really big challenges. If we've been slow in acting on vaccination rollouts, let me tell you how slow we're moving on addressing climate change health risks. That is like a cliff that we will be at the bottom of, facing a disaster, before there will be any real action. There are serious questions that need to be dealt with, and the government needs to pull up its socks and get on with it. 16:05 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins The envy of the world, Australia is a leader in its response to the coronavirus pandemic. This is because the Morrison government's world-class response is evidence based, expert informed and timely. Across the country, experts have worked together to deliver ongoing advice and guidance. Consistently, the government has listened to and acted on this advice, advice that Australians have listened to and engaged with, and this has resulted in outcomes that all Australians can feel extremely proud of. As we've always said, no system for managing the COVID-19 pandemic will be perfect. This is not simply due to human error, but additionally because the incubation period of the virus and its variants can be beyond the 14 days required for self-isolation. Quarantining has safely brought home more than 350,000 Australians, 3,500 of which had COVID. Unfortunately, 21 leaks occurred, but only 21 leaks occurred. That is remarkable in itself with such an incredibly infectious virus. Last year we took rapid and proactive steps to close the border and implement quarantine measures, but, just as importantly, we understood that this was not the only defence mechanism that we needed to deploy in our response. Indeed, as for all public health measures, we've exercised a diversified armamentarium towards COVID. Whether this is the triple protection for individuals, of masks, handwashing and physical distancing, whether it is the triple protection for those arriving from overseas, of quarantining, contact tracing and social-distancing measures, or whether it's the investment of this government in a diversified portfolio of vaccines, of AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Novavax and Moderna, our government has understood the ability of this country to respond. And it's included a rapid development of CSL manufacturing capabilities for the AZ vaccine. The Morrison government's targeted approach of safeguarding those most at risk ensures that they are the most protected. This includes residents of aged-care facilities and frontline workers who've been prioritised in our vaccination program, starting with stage 1a and stage 1b. These are the approaches that the Australian people know they can trust and rely on to get us through the pandemic. We all know that a one-size-fits-all approach to the pandemic doesn't work. It requires a dynamic approach, one that prevents and responds to COVID. As we've seen with the New South Wales government, Premier Gladys Berejiklian has rolled out a targeted and dynamic method with hotspot containment as opposed to entire state lockdowns, which means, time and time again, not only has she protected the citizens of New South Wales from the ravages of this disease she's saved businesses from the devastation of economic lockdown. My fellow Victorians: my heart goes out to you all. You have lived through one week of lockdown and are now staring at a second week of lockdown. Thank you to all Victorians for your efforts ensuring that you, your family and your friends are safe, for keeping us all safe. Thank you for all who've already received the jab. Just yesterday, 20,492 Victorians received a dose of the vaccine. That is a record number. As the vaccination program ramps up, I'm proud the Morrison government is continuing to deliver a free, safe and effective defence against the scourge of COVID-19. The first one million doses were delivered in 47 days—the fourth million doses were delivered in just 13 days. The ramp-up of the vaccine is happening at speed. This is, indeed, the biggest vaccine rollout in our country's history, one that has had to be delivered when there have been supply constraints outside of this country's control. On this side, we understand a calm, open, transparent and accountable government is best suited to deliver the public health outcomes this country needs and deserves. In contrast, those opposite play blame-game tactics. That is all that they can muster. Australians can see through these tactics of playing politics with the pandemic, of playing the blame game. I want to re-emphasise for those listening across Australia the calm message from this government: if you have symptoms, get tested; if you've been in contact with someone with the virus, isolate and get tested; and, finally and most importantly, if you're eligible, get vaccinated. 16:10 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth I'd like to start my remarks by saying thank you to the people of Victoria, who are doing work on behalf of the entire nation right now. Every Australian stands with you. Those of us who don't live in Victoria don't know exactly the pain that you feel on the news today that you will continue your lockdown, but there are many millions of Australians who support you. There are also Australians who just do not understand how this government continues to make so many mistakes. They can deliver cuts, but they can't deliver a jab. They can stab Malcolm Turnbull in the back, but they can't jab the population. And when we needed the ad-man Prime Minister—when we needed his advertising skills, at the most pressing time—he couldn't deliver the ad campaign the nation needs to boost vaccine confidence. The Prime Minister had two jobs: quarantine and vaccine delivery. Vaccines save lives—if you can get your hands on them. In politics, we all know—we've learnt in different ways in this place—that a small prick can make a big difference. Vaccines prove that point. It's been 100 days since the Prime Minister got his vaccine. We saw the photo op. We saw him doing the peace symbol. Even I sort of hoped that things were going to get moving—but they didn't. We just saw the photo op; we didn't see any action to get the vaccine rollout moving. The United Kingdom got Elton John and the United States got Dolly Parton—and we got the Prime Minister. Maybe it's time that he texts Julie Bishop again and says, 'Can I have Tina Arena's number; I need to ask her for help with a public information campaign.' The Prime Minister says, 'It's not a race.' I've heard the Prime Minister say many, many times, 'It's not a race.' He's not the only person in my life who says, 'It's not a race.' My three-year-old Leo, when he is losing at anything—when he can't eat his dinner as quick as I can or when he can't get into his pyjamas quick enough or whatever—he goes, 'It's not a race, daddy; it's not a race,' and, for him, that's totally fine. But we are racing against a virus, and we've seen—in terms of what's happening in Victoria—just how quickly it can race ahead of us when we become at all complacent. The Prime Minister says, 'It's not a race.' He promised 16 pop-up vaccination clinics. Three of them are open and they are all in Sydney. None of these pop-up clinics are in any other state or in any other capital—just in Sydney. We know that there is a problem with the way the Prime Minister sees the country, because he does look to preference New South Wales. I remember when the New South Wales Premier said in the media that the Prime Minister was 'sympathetic' to putting New South Wales ahead of other states in the vaccine distribution queue. That, of course, requires having a vaccine distribution plan, though. We're not even in the top 100 nations for vaccine distribution. It takes a very special type of incompetence to find something slower than the NBN that this government rolled out, but they've found it: they had an even slower vaccine rollout. Only 8.74 per cent of aged-care staff are fully vaccinated. Only 1.5 per cent of disability care residents are fully vaccinated. We still have no plan for national distribution of the vaccine for our schoolteachers or for our early childhood educators—people who have high contact with vulnerable Australians. Then it comes to the failure of hotel quarantine. There have been 21 outbreaks from hotel quarantine—the latest in my electorate of Perth, at the Pan Pacific hotel. The workers at the Pan Pacific hotel do a fabulous job. They have not only felt the huge economic whack of COVID; they've also stepped up to help. But what they need to see is that we provide other options for quarantine. You could look to do something in Learmonth or Esperance or you could look—as the Premier of Western Australia has suggested today—to do something in Busselton or in south-west WA. You can't avoid the fact that hotel quarantine did an amazing job in 2020, but it is broken for the challenge we face in 2021, and the government needs to step up. This government needs to take responsibility. Even if it's just acknowledging that it is the one responsible for vaccines and it is the one responsible for quarantine, it would be a huge step in the right direction. 16:15 Mr YOUNG 201906 Longman When the COVID-19 virus began spreading around the world early last year, the Morrison government put the health and wellbeing of Australians at the forefront of our response. We listened to advice from health experts, like Australian government Chief Medical Officer Professor Paul Kelly, and we continue to do so. We secured our international borders and worked with the states and territories to introduce quarantine systems. We have provided, and continue to provide, unprecedented levels of direct economic support to help individuals, families and businesses in all states and territories get through this pandemic. The economic measures we have put in place are vital not only for the economic health of the nation but for the mental health of all Australians. Many businessowners and employees would have otherwise faced the prospect of losing their jobs and financial stress at home caused by the loss of an income. This latest outbreak in Victoria is not a small matter, and the Australian government in the 2021-22 budget announced just two weeks ago anticipated that future COVID-19 outbreaks would occur in Australia. Our budget measures were calibrated accordingly, with the budget providing an additional $41 billion of COVID related economic support on top of existing support. In the 2021-22 budget, the Australian government provided a further $1.7 billion to extend our COVID-19 health response package and a further $1.9 billion for vaccine purchases and rollout. These measures bring the total health related COVID expenditure to over $25 billion. We have extended the operation of the Medicare COVID-19 pathology test items until the end of this year. The more than 300 temporary telehealth items that were implemented in March 2020 have also been extended until the end of this year. These items were previously due to stop at the end of this month. As of yesterday 60.2 million telehealth services have been delivered to 14 million patients, with nearly $3.1 billion in benefits paid. The government continues to work with peak bodies to co-design permanent telehealth as part of reforms to modernise Medicare and provide flexibility of access to primary and allied healthcare services. On 13 March last year the Australian government and all state and territory governments signed the National Partnership on COVID-19 Response. As part of this partnership we will cover 50 per cent of costs incurred by state and territory public health and hospital systems when responding to COVID-19 outbreaks. From 31 March last year we guaranteed the viability of private hospitals to respond to COVID-19 and to help them resume operations at the end of the pandemic. As of 7 May this year the government has provided $5.5 billion to states and territories under this partnership. As of yesterday there were 142 COVID-19 GP led respiratory clinics operating nationally, of which 19 are Aboriginal community controlled health services and 80 are situated outside of metropolitan areas. More than 1,265,600 consultations have occurred in these clinics, and more than 1.1 million COVID tests have been conducted. These GP led clinics have serviced patients from 2,430 different postcodes, including those in my electorate of Longman. Throughout the COVID-19 vaccination program, vaccination has continued to scale appropriately with the available vaccine supply. The first million vaccine doses were delivered in 47 days, the second million were delivered in 19 days, the third million were delivered in 17 days and the fourth million took another 13 days to administer. Above all else, safety remains the highest priority. We will not rush this rollout and risk the safety of Australians. We will continue to take the advice of our medical experts and act accordingly. The Australian government has also provided up to $3.2 billion to secure essential PPE equipment and other medical supplies along with antibiotics and antivirals to help in preventing the transmission of COVID-19. More than half a billion masks have been secured by the department of health to ensure a continued supply to frontline healthcare workers. We have also committed $374 million to researching COVID, including research on vaccines, treatment and clinical responses. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Australian government has provided more than $2 billion to support people in aged care. We have implemented a dedicated pathology service for rapid specimen collection and testing of suspected cases. As of 25 May, Sonic Healthcare, under contract to the Australian government, had conducted 369,000 tests at 2,432 unique residential aged-care facilities across Australia. The government has responded to the public health challenges facing Australia and will continue to do so. 16:20 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy Government has a limited amount of money. If you wish to take the number of environmentalists working full-time in the Far North Queensland area from three to 147, obviously you're going to burn up an awful lot of money. If you want to build a $10 billion tunnel in Brisbane—which is not needed and has never been asked for by the public—you're going to burn up a lot of money. If you want to spend $15 billion on roadworks and flyovers over flyovers over flyovers between the airport and the CBD in Brisbane, you're going to burn up a lot of money. If you want to build a billion dollar pleasure dome for yourselves, as the Queensland government did—it was a Liberal government; most of the rest of this is ALP—and billions of dollars on the Olympics, then it ends up with the head of the health department in Queensland saying to me on the telephone, 'It's no use. You're kicking up about Mareeba Hospital not having an outpatients. Outpatients in Queensland have ceased to exist.' The greatest pride of the Queensland people was that, of all the places in the world, you could walk in 24 hours a day, every day of the year, including Christmas, and get free health services. Now, at the coalface, at Charters Towers, my home town, where my family's lived since the late 1870s, there was an outpatients. It's closed. It's a huge building in front of the hospital. It is closed. It has across it 'Closed'. The only entrance to the hospital has 'Inpatients' written across it. I had a spider bite, from a white spider. They're very, very deadly. This one turned out not to be, but my hand swelled up, so I went there. You sit on a chair outside the hospital, waiting, if it's an emergency case. If it's not an emergency case, go home. So we only have healthcare in Queensland for 40 hours a week now. That's all. That's what's happened. The latest figures that I've received via a back door is that the Queensland Health budget is $600 million in deficit, and there'll have to be massive cutbacks on what we've got—on what we're down to now. Don't people in this place understand that you will go broke if you keep spending money on multistorey pleasure domes for yourselves or buying votes by flyovers over flyovers over flyovers? You can't do it and deliver a health service. What are your priorities? What are your priorities? It is the shame of this nation—and I've brought it up again and again and I have some difficulty in living with the fact that I'm not going very well on it. When I am not going very well on a serious issue, I get very, very nasty. And I'm about to turn extremely nasty over the issue of our First Australians, my brother-cousins, because life expectancy—on the only figures I could get, because they're hiding the figures—in the gulf Cape York community is 41 for males and 53 for females. In the Torres Strait, it's 20 years less than for the rest of Australia. Both the ALP government and the National-Liberal party government closed down the market gardens in every single community. The much-maligned missionaries took the people in, protected them from being shot at and burnt out and starved and poisoned. They protected them. They protected them also with their diet. Because they couldn't go out and forage for food on the open plains anymore, they had market gardens. When we inherited the market gardens, we kept them going till the fall of the government in 1990. Worse than that, the federal government banned the backyard vegetable gardens. Why would you do that in the Torres Strait? 'Diseases could get in.' The war and trading canoes, the raiding canoes, have been coming down from New Guinea for 40,000 years, and if disease was going to get in, it would have long since arrived. Every backyard had a fruit and vegetable garden. I cannot remember having a single meal—and I probably had about 300 when I was a minister in the Torres Strait—where I ate any non-Indigenous food at all. By that, I mean I ate Torres Strait Island food. It was fish, it was turtle, it was dugong, it was prawns, it was crayfish and of course there were mangoes, bananas, sweet potato, yam and taro—all of those things. It was a very, very healthy diet. That was up until 1990. What is going on is the shame of the governments of Australia. (Time expired) 16:25 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash I say to the member for Kennedy that I expect there are some difficult health challenges in your part of Queensland that need to be addressed and I'm sure you're the right member in the right place at the right time to address those issues. I thank the member for Indi for putting on the table this matter of public importance on the urgent need to respond to the public health challenges facing the nation. I want to talk about one of the responses to those public health challenges and the way that response worked. I think just about all of us in this room would have received the benefit of a telephone conversation with your GP, rather than attending the clinic. In fact, during the pandemic the particular clinic that I have attended in Pakenham for many, many years just didn't want you in the building. They didn't want you anywhere near the place, unless it was necessary for you to come to the building, and then you had to either wait in your car or wait outside or wait at a certain point. This was very hard for older people, so the government introduced a telehealth system to address the crisis within communities. I make this point because I felt through the 18 months that we've been living with this pandemic, a long time, one thing I haven't mentioned is that not only are our people concerned, disrupted and fearful but they're tired. They've worked hard. You have businesses that have worked for 30 years to build themselves up and have been blown away. They may have survived up to this point and then another lockdown finishes them off. That's the reality that we face. I've got a whole stack of emails here and that's exactly what's happened to these businesses. It's just heartbreaking for these people. They're angry, and I can understand their anger. But directing that anger is very difficult. I've always said to everybody in this House, when you're in a leadership position and you have to make a decision, put yourself in their position to say, 'What would you have done?' They say, 'Well, I wouldn't have made those mistakes.' No, but we all make mistakes. Things can go wrong and they will go wrong. We've seen governments right across the nation making decisions on the run the whole time. They had to make those decisions. You can criticise them and say they were right or they were wrong, or they should have been quicker, or they should have thought of this beforehand. But put yourself in the position of those leaders. I go back to the way that we've handled the telehealth services. But it's expensive. I hadn't even thought about how much those telehealth services might have cost. As of 1 June 2021, 60.2 million health services have been delivered to 14 million patients at a cost of $3.1 billion paid to 84,395 practitioners who have benefited from that. It's expensive. A lot of what governments have done in this process— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 72184 I interrupt the member. The time for this discussion has concluded. MOTIONS 72 MOTIONS Department of Defence 72 16:29 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes that: (a) the Government recently extended a contract for the Department of Defence, for the storage and management of data, with Chinese-owned data centre Global Switch, without due process or public tender; and (b) the extension of this contract threatens Australia's national security; (2) condemns the Government for putting cost-saving measures above the safety of Australians' national security; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) immediately terminate all government contracts with foreign-owned external data storage companies, including Global Switch; (b) promptly and securely transfer all externally-stored government data to Australian-owned and managed data centres; and (c) explain to the House why the Department of Defence has delayed its withdrawal from Global Switch, unlike other government agencies such as ASIC and the ATO which have already begun transferring their data. Leave not granted. Mr WILKIE C2T I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Clark from moving the following motion immediately— That the House: (1) notes that: (a) the Government recently extended a contract for the Department of Defence, for the storage and management of data, with Chinese-owned data centre Global Switch, without due process or public tender; and (b) the extension of this contract threatens Australia's national security; (2) condemns the Government for putting cost-saving measures above the safety of Australians' national security; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) immediately terminate all government contracts with foreign-owned external data storage companies, including Global Switch; (b) promptly and securely transfer all externally-stored government data to Australian-owned and managed data centres; and (c) explain to the House why the Department of Defence has delayed its withdrawal from Global Switch, unlike other government agencies such as ASIC and the ATO which have already begun transferring their data. We must suspend standing orders and deal with this motion urgently because we must urgently get Australian data out of the hands of foreign owned companies. I would remind members of the facts of this matter. They are quite simply that the Department of Defence currently stores data with the Global Switch company. Global Switch was an Australian owned company, but in 2016 Global Switch's ownership changed when the Chinese datatech consortium Elegant Jubilee bought a 49 per cent stake in it. Since then, Global Switch has become entirely Chinese owned. Four years ago the then Treasurer, now the Prime Minister, gave government agencies a deadline of September 2020 to transfer their data from Global Switch to an Australian owned data company. Despite that, the government has extended the contract between the Department of Defence and Global Switch until 2025. The contract has been re-signed for $53.5 million, which is approximately $300,000 above the original quote. By the way, the ATO and ASIC also have data stored with Global Switch; however, they have begun transferring their data out with intentions to have it all withdrawn by next year, 2022. There is an urgent need to deal with this motion because there's an urgent need to get government data out of foreign owned data centres. This is wrong on so many levels. It is obviously wrong from a national security point of view. It is self-evident that we should not have sensitive government data in the possession of foreign owned data companies, whether that data is stored within Australia or up in a cloud or offshore. It beggars belief. If you were to walk down the street and ask 100 people at random, 'Do you think it's okay to have sensitive official data is in the possession of a foreign owned company?' I reckon 100 out of 100 Australians would say, 'Of course it shouldn't be in the possession of a foreign owned company!' It's also about exercising and proving our sovereignty. Are we a sovereign nation or what? Are we a sovereign nation, with the intent and the commitment and the capacity to look after our sovereignty and our security, starting with storing our data with Australian owned companies? In this day and age, data is every bit as important as the land on which we walk and our resources. It is part of our very being and our nation. It's a missed opportunity to support Australian companies and Australian workers and to ensure that the profits that are enjoyed by these companies go back to Australian shareholders. It's that simple. This is not about any one country. In some ways, it's unfortunate that Global Switch is a Chinese company, because there's been a lot of talk about China and our bilateral relationship, obviously, in recent times. But this is not about China specifically; it's about the principle of Australian data being stored in the possession of an Australian company and not a foreign owned company. We could be having this conversation in much the same terms if Global Switch were owned by the Singaporeans, or the Kiwis even, or the British or the Americans or the Canadians or the Germans or the French. It's the matter of principle that Global Switch is owned by a company based in another country. That is the point. What we're talking about today is a symptom of a broader problem, and that is foreign ownership, involvement and influence in our country. In some ways, the Global Switch issue is a symptom of this bigger problem, like the fact that the Van Diemen's Land Company, Australia's biggest dairy asset, is owned by a Chinese company—a Chinese company that made all sorts of commitments to the Foreign Investment Review Board, the Treasurer and the Australian community, commitments that have not been delivered. They said they'd be exporting fresh milk to China—not happening. They said they'd be employing about 100 extra Australians—hasn't happened. They said there'd be significant capital improvements, including for environmental protections—hasn't happened. Fortunately, I should add, the company that now owns the Van Diemen's Land Company has committed to dispose of some of the properties, but it's still the fact that Australia's largest dairy-producing asset is foreign owned. About a quarter of Tasmania's agricultural land is now foreign owned. That is completely out of step with public expectations. The Port of Darwin is on a 99-year lease to a foreign company. The mainland east coast gas distribution network is controlled and owned by a foreign company. It is not good enough and it is completely and utterly out of step with community expectations, our security needs and the importance of safeguarding our sovereignty. The government not only needs to get Defence data out of Global Switch; it needs to have a fresh look at the whole issue of foreign ownership and involvement in our nation. We need root-and-branch reform. I'm not averse to foreign investment. This country was built on foreign investment, and we need foreign investment. I'm not anti-foreign investment. That would be a ludicrous proposition. But we do need to apply a national interest test to foreign ownership or control of our strategic assets. Surely the data centre storing the Australian Department of Defence's data is a strategic matter. There are so many reforms we could turn our minds to. I'm very mindful that I'm speaking to the need to suspend standing orders. This is such an urgent matter. That's why we need to suspend standing orders now and deal with this motion and start dealing with the broader issue, the unacceptable issue, of excessive foreign involvement, influence and ownership in this country. After we've dealt with Global Switch, let's turn our minds to all of the other reforms that might apply; for example, the fact that the Foreign Investment Review Board must apply much tougher scrutiny to investment that could adversely affect Australia's agriculture, business and property sectors, including the commercial property sector, as well as—and this is crucial—our cultural, environmental and heritage wellbeing. We've got to lower the threshold for FIRB's involvement in the purchase of agricultural land. Currently the threshold is $15 million. That's an awful big farm in a lot of parts of Australia! Surely the FIRB's threshold for scrutiny of the purchase of agricultural land should be more in the order of $2 million. As to this idea that it's all current foreign business investment and acquisitions of an interest of 20 per cent or more, or businesses valued at over $261 million—surely that's too high as well. I don't know what the correct figure is, but to think that the FIRB would only be interested in a business acquisition by a foreign entity when the value was over $261 million is ludicrous. I'll end my comments there. I'm grateful that the government has allowed me to have my say. I believe I'm speaking for a great many Australians when I say: we need to suspend standing orders immediately and deal with this motion immediately; the government, as quickly as it humanly can, has to get our sensitive defence data out of the Global Switch company, because it's foreign-owned. We've got to start worrying more about our national security—start worrying more about exercising and proving our sovereignty. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Is there a seconder? 16:41 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy I second the motion. We could talk about strategic economic assets, but my honourable colleague who is moving this said, the first time we moved it, that you couldn't make this up. You seriously couldn't make this up! Australia's most strategic security asset is that information system. And it's in the hands of people that put on their national television, over there in China, pictures of Australian soldiers cutting the throats of babies. They advocated, five weeks ago, that Australia should be bombed. And you've given them all of the control of your information system. Now, I was a minister for almost a decade in the Queensland government and I know the power of inertia, and I would plead with the honourable Minister for Defence and the Assistant Minister for Defence to understand. Don't underestimate the power of inertia in the Public Service. They will undermine and ignore you continuously and continuingly and give you four million reasons why they can't do it. There is no way of dealing with public servants, except with ruthless brutality. And if you don't agree with that statement, then you do so at your own peril, because we're in a parliament here where the answer to our strategic fuel security was to put our tanks in the United States! Well, I don't know—when I went to school, they told me the United States was on the other side of the globe! It's in the Northern Hemisphere and Western Hemisphere and we are in the Southern Hemisphere and Eastern Hemisphere. Now, I don't blame the minister. I think they're dealing with people who will never admit they're wrong and will constantly assert that they were right 'because'—and if you think that you can override them, then you are kidding yourself. And there is only one way of dealing with them. The previous speaker has great respect in this place. He worked in the field of strategic security in our armed forces and was a senior officer in the Army in this field, so he knows what he's talking about. But I think that 25 million Australians know what he's talking about. I have never seen a government more out of step with the people. They've let every asset be taken over by foreigners. If you go through the strategic assets, you may say that water is one of the most important. Well, Cubbie Station is the biggest consumer of water in Australia, and it's owned by foreigners. If you want to go to electricity, 42 per cent of the electricity control in Australia is in the hands of Chinese corporations, some of which are owned directly by the Chinese government. Some 15 per cent of our electricity is now coming from glass on the roofs. That all comes from China. Every single piece of glass comes from China. If you want to add it up, that kicks it up to 60 per cent of our electricity being controlled out of China. I gave a scenario in a question last week in parliament. As a compulsive reader of history books since I was six years of age, I am well aware of the lessons of history. Our fuel comes from Singapore and South Korea. We export all of our own oil and condensate and we import our petrol and diesel from overseas, from Singapore and South Korea. They are two countries that are not going to defy China. If China bungs on an embargo—and for those of you that are my age, we saw embargoes by the Middle East on numerous occasions—if you say that it doesn't happen, the First World War was effectively a reaction to Winston Churchill buying a majority share in British Petroleum. The English people already owned Shell— (Time expired) 16:46 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I want to speak briefly on this motion and say to the parliament and to the Australian people that I support this motion. I think if COVID has taught us anything it is how critical it is that we own what's ours. We need to own our data. We need to own our rail. We need to own our electricity, our water and most importantly our land. I think that the Australian people would be absolutely and utterly gobsmacked if they knew that the government had extended a contract for the Department of Defence for the storage and management of data with Chinese-owned data centre Global Switch. That has been done without due process or public tender. It is extraordinary. Our data is worth gold. Our data is everything. That is our national security. That is our sovereignty. Over at least the last four decades we have pretty much sold every single thing of value in this nation that we possibly could have to foreigners. We often talk about New Zealand in this place. New Zealand is so much smarter than us. New Zealand has a threshold: if it's not in the national interest, if it's over five hectares, it doesn't pass. Yet here we are happy to sell everything—our precious water, our best land—and we are putting our data at incredible risk. I would urge the government to look at this motion. This is incredibly important. Let's address this. Let's fix this wrong. I commend the member for Clark for this motion. 16:48 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning I will respond to the motion. I thank the members for Clark and Kennedy for moving this motion. I know they are both coming from the same place. Both have served our country in uniform, and I know they both appreciate the growing threats to our security in the region. I understand their keen interest in this matter. It's an interest that I share. It's an interest that many Australians share. Members may recall that I made comments about this matter some years ago as a backbencher, and they are views that I still hold. Australia's digital sovereignty is near and dear to my heart, as it is to the hearts of the members behind me on this side of the chamber as well. It goes without saying that the use of mission data is critical to the successful conduct of defence operations both in war and in peace. The way we manage our data security and our data management is central to our ongoing relationship of trust with the Australian people, which is why the Global Switch Ultimo data centre has been such a lightning rod in the public square. I can assure the members for Clark and Kennedy that Defence has migrated its most sensitive data to a purpose-built data centre. Consistent with the whole-of-government hosting strategy, Defence data migration of sensitive ICT data and assets was completed ahead of schedule and under budget prior to the expiration of the original Global Switch Ultimo lease in September 2020. In fact, the most sensitive defence data was removed from GSU in May 2020. Defence is progressing work to migrate less sensitive and unclassified data assets to an alternative data centre through a rigorous risk based approach to ensure there is no adverse impact to defence operations. Additionally Defence has comprehensive security controls in place of GSU to protect against compromise by a foreign power or other malicious actors. I reiterate to the members and for the benefit of the House, control and access to the data storage issue remains under the full control of the Australian government. The facility was designed with multiple layers of physical and cybersecurity controls. Physical security arrangements are accredited by relevant government agencies and include 24/7 security presence, closed circuit television monitoring, sensors and alarms. The Defence Security Operation Centre provides 24/7 cybersecurity protection. A secure gateway provides further assurance to prevent unauthorised access. In combination, these measures represent the highest level of security assurance. Indeed, this is something I've repeatedly pressed to my department. Ronald Reagan, back in the eighties, made famous the Russian proverb: 'Trust, but verify.' Mr Katter interjecting— Mr Wilkie interjecting— Mr HASTIE 260805 Member for Kennedy, member for Clark, I don't just take the departmental officials' word as gospel. My eagle eye will be on this problem going forward, and I will be seeking additional updates, as I did last week, because my concern is no different to yours. I know the Minister for Defence is also keenly aware of this issue, and we will both be monitoring this process carefully to ensure it happens as quickly as possible. Again, the strength of our foreign investment rules and the fact that Defence retains full control of its GSU data provides the highest level of assurance as we complete the migration of the remaining defence information. The fact remains, consistent with the Whole-of-Government Hosting Strategy, Defence has migrated all sensitive ICT assets from the Global Switch Ultimo data centre prior to the expiration of the original GSU lease last year. Member for Clark, member for Kennedy, had I been a decision-maker many years ago, this would never have happened. But I'm here now, and we're working through this problem. Debate on this motion is a good place to make a few points on the importance that I place on Defence becoming a more data informed organisation. In the years ahead, data and the management of data will be critical to our nation's security. I've always been of the view that Defence needs to adopt a disciplined approach to how information is collected, stored, analysed and, most importantly, how data is distributed across the force. A defence data strategy is well in the planning to guide data management and improve data literacy. This is critical to Defence becoming a more mission focused organisation. Data is critical. This is clear from the 2020 Defence Strategic Update and the Defence Transformation Strategy—I'm sure they're documents we've all read. The Defence Transformation Strategy provides the vision and framework for the long-term enterprise-wide transformation. This will enable Defence's capacity to adapt as our strategic circumstances change, and on page 36 the strategy makes clear: In developing the Defence Transformation Strategy, senior leaders emphasised that our Defence culture must recognise the criticality of data to everything that we do, and adopt a far more disciplined and deliberate approach to how information is collected, stored, analysed and applied in decision making processes. At a more local level there are things that all Australians can do to ensure we are strengthening our digital sovereignty. We live in a data-rich world. This is a new reality for many Australians. The internet is now the neural system of our lives. Over the pandemic we've migrated much of our lives online—a whole host of services from news, to work, to social media. It's also important to our economy, and it's the lifeblood of our democratic society. Whilst our lives online present many opportunities, it also presents threats and challenges. Just as government organisations need to take data and cybersecurity seriously, Australians too can do their bit. Many members would remember last year on 1 July when the Prime Minister at the Australian Defence Force Academy launched the 2020 Defence Strategic Update. The strategic head winds are blowing hard, and we are straddling vast change in the Indo-Pacific region where we're seeing the greatest geo-strategic competition between nation states, we're seeing militaries modernise and we're seeing the use of grey-zone tactics to coerce states below the threshold of conventional warfare. Cyberwarfare and espionage are grey-zone activities used by nation states to undermine their competitors' sovereignty and also to break apart habits of cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region. Cyber is a new battlefield, and, whether we like it or not, we are all joined in an online contest to preserve our personal security but also our digital sovereignty as a country. We can't be complacent. I know the government is not complacent. Defence is not complacent. No government has done more to strengthen the foreign investment rules in protecting our national sovereignty than this one. I know the member for Kennedy and the member for Clark won't be completely satisfied, but this is a work in progress, and we've done a lot over the last seven years. No government has done more to strengthen our national security than this one. Being the Chair of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security over the last four years, I've seen the body of legislation that has passed through that committee and into law through both houses of this parliament. We take these issues very seriously, and we are getting on with the job of ensuring that our critical data is safe and under control. I thank the member for Kennedy and the member for Clark for this motion. As always, my office door is open to you both—and to anyone else who would like further information on this issue. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY The time allocated for this debate has expired. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the motion be disagreed to.

The House divided. [17:01]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

63 AYES Alexander, JG Allen, K Andrews, KL Archer, BK Bell, AM Broadbent, RE Buchholz, S Burke, AS Burney, LJ Coleman, DB Conaghan, PJ Connelly, V Coulton, M Drum, DK (teller) Dutton, PC Evans, TM Falinski, JG Fletcher, PW Flint, NJ Freelander, MR Gee, AR Georganas, S Gillespie, DA Hamilton, GR Hammond, CM Hastie, AW Hawke, AG Hogan, KJ Howarth, LR Joyce, BT Laming, A Landry, ML Leeser, J Liu, G Marino, NB Martin, FB McIntosh, MI O'Connor, BPJ O'Dowd, KD Pasin, A Pearce, GB Pitt, KJ Porter, CC Price, ML Ramsey, RE (teller) Rishworth, AL Robert, SR Sharma, DN Simmonds, J Stanley, AM (teller) Stevens, J Sukkar, MS Tehan, DT Thompson, P Tudge, AE van Manen, AJ Wallace, AB Webster, AE Wilson, RJ Wilson, TR Wyatt, KG Young, T Zimmerman, T 6 NOES Bandt, AP (teller) Haines, H Katter, RC Sharkie, RCC Steggall, Z Wilkie, AD (teller) 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

BILLS 77 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021 77

Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021

Second Reading 77 17:07 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's wonderful to be back speaking on this legislation, because it is so important to make sure that we get proper assessment of laws that overgovern superannuation. As I was saying before I was interrupted by question time and 90-second statements, the system is broken. It's designed and organised to advance the interests of the few at the expense of the many. Members of the Labor Party know exactly why it is: because they set it up that way, because what super funds do is launder money through marketing expenses through to unions and allied parties and then through to the Australian Labor Party, which is why, if you come into this chamber and if you raise criticisms of organised labour and unions today, a few people on the Labor side will grumble and get a little bit upset. But, if you criticise the super system, they will go into all-out war, because they know it is their lifeblood. It is coming at the expense of Australians and their retirement savings and at the expense of their wages to bankroll the interests of the Labor Party. The more we call this out, the angrier they get, which means it makes me more determined. There is nothing they will not do to steal your money from your accounts and your super fund to advance their interests. That is what is at the heart of this legislation. Trying to break apart— Mr Gosling interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY The member for Goldstein will resume his seat for a moment. The member for Solomon will cease interjecting. Mr TIM WILSON IMW That is what is at the heart of this legislation. That is why they will fight it at every step of the way. We will not stop until we call it out and we stop the misinformation, the misallocation and the misuse of Australians' superannuation money. What we hear from the shadow minister for superannuation in this debate is the most hysterical and ridiculous allegations about the provisions in the bill which say the Treasurer can override the waste and mismanagement of Australians' superannuation funds towards activities that have nothing to do with retirement savings—absolutely nothing. That is what is happening right now, with the waste that is going towards TheNew Dailyso they can buy the interest of journalists who then go on to taxpayer funded organisations to misrepresent the interests and the issues that affect retiring Australians. There is no integrity at the heart of this system. There is no integrity in their focus on trying to buy off Australians through the system that they have designed. Listen to the hypocrisy in this chamber from the Labor Party. They claim they're against the illegal payment provisions in this bill. But dare to suggest, 'Okay, let's remove the provision that's already in superannuation legislation which says it's illegal to use your own money'—your own money—'to buy your own home,' and they say that must stay in the law at all costs. That is how hypocritical they are. If you genuinely believe that there should be no limitations on how members' money should be able to be spent by super funds, then allow Australians to use their superannuation money to buy their own home. You know, as I know, that the foundation of financial security in people's working life, and retirement, is home first, super second. But they do not want that, because they know it means empowering Australians and their families to take control of their financial interests for their own lives. That is why we believe in it so strongly, and we will not stop fighting. These laws go to the heart of what we stand for and who we want to empower. The debate around superannuation is not just one about retirement incomes and savings, as critical as they may be. It is a debate about power and who we want to empower. Do we want to empower fund managers or families? It's fund managers on the opposition side and families on the Liberal side. That is who we are. That is what we stand for. When Australians look at their finances, they should be able to make a choice. They should be able to choose how they spend their money and prioritise their financial interests. Let's look at the hard data. In 1992, there was about $280 billion in retirement savings in Australia. Since then, it has increased by a factor of 1,400. Just in case there is any ambiguity about that, that's 1,400 times. And what has been the decline in dependence on the pension over that same time frame? Is it 1,400? No. Is it 1,300? No. Is it 1,200? No. Is it 1,000? No. Is it 100 per cent? No. Is it eight per cent? No. The answer, according to the Callaghan report, is that it has gone from 67 per cent of Australian retirees needing support from the pension to 65 per cent. Have you ever seen such a massive accumulation of wealth in the hands and control of a few fund managers, at the expense of Australian families, for so little gain? No, but the Labor Party likes it that way. They know that, through it, they can control and bring organised capital and organised labour together to decide the future of this country, bypassing this parliament. They use that capital to buy ownership of companies and they then impose on them their own values, bypassing this very chamber, elected by the people of Australia. They know that, under the fund management system, no-one's elected; they're just appointed by their mates. And they threaten and bully any business in this country who dares stand up to them, like they threaten and bully and want to intimidate this chamber. That is why we won't give up. This isn't just a debate about retirement savings, though it is that; it's a debate about power in our country and where it rests—with the people, with families, with elected representatives, or simply in the hands of a few fund managers. That's why they like it that way and that's why they hate this legislation so much. They see it as a break on their control. It empowers Australians instead. We have to keep fighting. That has always been at the heart of the structure of the Labor Party. They want a corporate estate—big capital, big unions, big government, working together at your expense, where the people of Australia have no control over their own lives. They want Australians to be serfs to their own superannuation funds. Let's look at the facts. They argue that Australians shouldn't be able to use their superannuation to buy their own homes and get on the first rung on the ladder to provide the foundations for retirement security as well as their working life. Yet let's see their criticism when Cbus spends $800 million of your Australian money to buy properties that it owns and that it will rent to you. This is a corrupt system that needs to be called out. They will use your money, the people of Australia's money, to buy homes that they own and that they'll rent back to you. But if you dare stand up and say, 'I want to use my super to buy my own home,' they'll say, 'Destroying the system.' This system is designed to favour the few at the expense of the many. They only have to take small clips along the way. When you've got 26 million people legally compelled to contribute money into an account, they only have to take $5 or $10 a year, laundered through the unions and marketing expenses and heading back to the Labor Party, to take a massive share of the wealth of the nation that they control. That is what happens every day, and if you try to breathe any accountability into this system, they fight it every step of the way. They ought to be ashamed of themselves. Go and look at the House Economics Committee. In this term of parliament, we've continually asked superannuation funds about their expenditure. What do unions do and what do the industry funds do? They refuse to answer. They launder their money through IFM investors to fund their super funds. As soon as it goes in, they say, 'We're not accountable to the parliament of the people of Australia anymore.' How can you stand by this system and the corruption and the misuse of— Mr Gosling interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY Order! The member for Goldstein will resume his seat. The member for Solomon will either take his seat and sit in here quietly, or leave the chamber. The choice is yours before I go to the next step. Mr TIM WILSON IMW How can you stand by this system that massively disempowers Australians, launders money into different funds, where it becomes unaccountable, and then they refuse to answer questions put by the parliament of the people of Australia. That is what happens. They keep things secret from the people of Australia, while coming into this chamber and demanding that we are compelling the people of Australia to give them more money. It is so corrupt. It is so founded on fleecing people and their wages, as the Secretary of the Treasury said in estimates only yesterday. Every increase in superannuation contributions comes at the expense of the wages of Australians today, but if you dare point that out, you get hounded down by members of the opposition, by the industry funds who use your hundreds of millions of dollars—nearly half a billion dollars over the past five years in advertising and marketing campaigns to make the claim that they're saints, when they're not. This is a symbol of your money being taken from you and controlled by others. This bill doesn't fix all of those problems. But this bill at least requires these funds to make sure, when they take your money, Australians' money, that it has to be used in your interests, a novel concept, I know. The more we see of that, the more we'll get accountability and less fleecing of the people of Australia. (Time expired) 17:18 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah The Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021 introduces several schedules which make changes to Australia's superannuation system. Superannuation works in concert with the aged pension and voluntary savings to deliver Australians a relatively high quality of life in their later years. Australians now have over $3 trillion invested in super. I'd like to thank all those that have contacted my office to give feedback in relation to this legislation. Australia's superannuation system is highly regarded around the world, despite the rants that we've heard in this place. Australia is ranked seventh in the OECD in terms of private pension assets as a proportion of GDP. Overall, the Melbourne Mercer Global Pension Index ranks the Australian retirement system third in a field of 37 countries. In my view, it is essential that Australians are comfortable and secure and can lead a great life in their twilight years, and super is integral to that goal. Yet there is always room for improvement. The recent Retirement Income Review, the royal commission into banking misconduct and several Productivity Commission reviews create the case for further change to the super system. I should note: if only we heard the same passion from the member for Goldstein in relation to the recommendations of the royal commission into banking. Seeking to implement recommendations arising from these reviews, overall, this bill makes some sensible amendments to improve the function of the super system. But there are some elements that are very concerning and which seem to ignore industry and community feedback and should be rethought. Schedule 1 of the bill will make changes to the Super Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 to limit the creation of multiple superannuation accounts for employees. The amendments implement the government's responses to recommendation 1 of the Productivity Commission's report, Superannuation: Assessing Efficiency and Competitiveness, and recommendation 3.5 of the final report of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry. This phase of reform will commence on 1 July 2021. From then, employers will no longer automatically create a new superannuation account in their chosen default fund for a new employee. Instead, this schedule will establish a stapling system whereby the employer obtains information about the employee's fund from the ATO if not provided by the employee. This will mean that, as an employee, your super fund follows you between jobs. This is a good thing, and will ensure that your money is compounding in a single account over time instead of multiple accounts. This provision will also reduce red tape and paperwork for businesses and individuals. Generally, this provision could make the system more efficient and more effective, but there is a concern. Funds should be performance tested before they are stapled. We can't have a situation where employees are stapled to a nonperforming fund. Right now, a poorly performing fund could be linked to an individual, and this will lead to suboptimal financial outcomes for that person. The government is aware of this deficiency and should take steps to fix it. Schedule 2 of this bill will amend the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 to require the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority to conduct an annual performance test for MySuper products and other products which will be set out in regulations. MySuper is the type of account you can have with a super fund. It's the default account that your employer will pay your super into unless you choose a different option. MySuper accounts typically offer lower fees and simple features. According to the bill's explanatory memorandum, these amendments will seek to ensure that superannuation products have their performance assessed against an objective, consistently applied benchmark, giving greater transparency to beneficiaries and protecting beneficiaries from underperforming products. A superannuation trustee providing such products will be required to give notice to its members who hold a product that has failed the performance test. Where a product has failed the performance test in two consecutive years, the trustee is prohibited from accepting new beneficiaries into that product. The regulations will specify circumstances which must be satisfied in order for APRA to lift the prohibition. Future regulations will prescribe other products to be included in the testing. APRA will also be provided with a prudential standard making power in relation to resolution making. This schedule will, if applied correctly, increase transparency and accountability in the super system, and I support that. Members of funds will be the beneficiaries if this is properly applied. I've outlined some concerns about performance testing previously. All products must be tested. So I call on the government to make sure that the regulations mandate that all funds be tested. In addition, the government should consider increasing the lead time on the commencement of this schedule from after this bill receives royal assent to later this year or the next. This is because some products won't be tested in time to be vetted before stapling, and we could have a situation where people are stapled to funds that have not been performance tested, and that would be a compounding disadvantage for many years. The government should set out the mechanism in the regulations where trustees can appeal decisions taken by APRA in relation to performance test outcomes. Time should be taken to sort through these issues. I have grave concerns about certain elements of schedule 3. It's quite interesting that these powers are in fact being provided by a coalition government, because much of schedule 3 goes against liberal values when it comes to not intervening in the market. Schedule 3 makes amendment to the SI(S) Act to require each trustee of a registrable superannuation entity and each trustee of a self-managed super fund to perform the trustee's duties and exercise the trustee's power in the best financial interests of the beneficiaries. The intent of this aspect is to increase the accountability of superannuation trustees in relation to the execution of their fiduciary duties. While it might seem sensible on face value—certainly after the blustering that we've heard in this place—it may have far-reaching consequences that will not be in the best interests of members, and it could impact, in fact, the interests and wellbeing of members. It's because, when considering whether something is in best financial interests, we could also capture a large number of activities and investments that exist in a grey area and that may become beneficial. For example, it could be that Australian Ethical super purchasing carbon offsets or spending money planting trees to reduce emissions—something which their members arguably want—could be prohibited under the best financial interests covenant as, without a price on carbon or an emissions trading scheme, it simply won't be given a financial value. Adding 'financial' to 'best interests' is something I'm concerned about. The government claims that this change arises from the 22nd recommendation of the Productivity Commission's review into superannuation, which recommended the government pursue a clearer articulation of what 'best interests' means but also left open by what mechanism it could occur. The Law Council of Australia, Commissioner Hayne of the banking royal commission, the Australian Industry Group, the Australian Institute of Company Directors and so on have all rejected the need for any legislative change. Commissioner Hayne, for example, stated: I consider that the existing rules, especially the best interests covenant and the sole purpose test, set the necessary standards. Those standards should be applied according to their terms and without more specific elaboration. The Australian Institute of Company Directors said that this issue: … was recently considered by Justice Jagot of the Federal Court in in APRA v Kelaher [2019] … It was the submission of all parties in that case (including APRA), and accepted by Justice Jagot that "the best interests of the beneficiaries are normally their best financial interests". The Law Council, in its submission to the exposure draft of this bill, stated that it understands that the current effect of section 52 is that the best interests of beneficiaries are normally, but not always, considered by the courts to be their best financial interests and that this provides for appropriate flexibility, practically, when applying this clause. So I ask: why is it therefore necessary to amend that section, if it normally means best financial interests and is believed to have all the necessary flexibility and practicality built in, especially as it could have far-reaching negative consequences for many different activities? The reversal of the burden of proof set out in schedule 3 makes amendments which reverse the evidentiary burden of proof in relation to civil proceedings in the event of a contravention of the covenant of best financial interests. This is problematic. Reversing the burden of proof is usually reserved for grave civil or criminal offences. Compounding this, the provision also lacks a materiality threshold. Anything and everything could be considered by the regulator. I quote CPA Australia, who outlined the problems with this arrangement: … this means … that a decision of any magnitude can be queried by the relevant regulator, requiring trustees to produce evidence on all occasions that trustees have acted in the best interests of members. APRA should therefore provide guidance as to what level and kind of expenditure will be scrutinised. They should also detail what kinds of records are to be kept, because we have to be clear. An increase in operating costs that would flow from this compliance requirement will be passed on to members, so ultimately it will be members of funds that will pay the price. Schedule 3 has one more change that needs to be highlighted. The bill amends the SI(S) Act to allow regulations to be made to specify that certain payments or investments made by trustees or registrable superannuation entities are prohibited, or prohibited unless certain conditions are met. I find this is a most outrageous provision, certainly coming from a Liberal government. The government claims that this regulation-making power is appropriate to ensure there is sufficient flexibility for the government to respond quickly to evolving industry practices as needed, and any regulations made would be subject to parliamentary scrutiny and disallowance. This highly politicises a question of commercial decisions. This means the Treasurer is being given the power to overrule the fiduciary duty, the commercial decisions, made by the trustees of superannuation funds. This power was not a recommendation of either the Productivity Commission report the government is relying on or the royal commission final report. The government states that it was recommended by APRA, but APRA also did not say what form this power could take. So it does beg the question: why is the government seeking this power? Of all the sections in this bill, this one is the most alarming for my constituents in the feedback I have received. They fear that it could be used to block investments in clean technologies or programs that promote social good. I agree with the Australian Institute of Company Directors, which believed that this clause would 'allow the government of the day to fetter the discretion' of superannuation funds and directors and their ability to make 'legitimate expenditure'. The Australian Industry Group also stated: The approach would create a red tape nightmare in the oversight of superannuation funds. Instead of concentrating on running funds in the best interests of their members, funds would be embroiled in compliance with an exceptionally intrusive regime. The threat of this ban and the uncertainty it generates would also affect how assets are priced due to increased regulatory risk. This is compounded by the latest draft regulations, which offer no forward guidance about the criteria for banned activities. To remedy this the government should amend the provision to that banning of investment activities so that it must meet a public interest test and must be first referred to the minister by APRA at the very least. This bill will introduce some measures to make super more efficient and effective. While it may improve efficiency, it is undermined by the very problematic provisions of schedule 3. Whilst the government claims to be focused on efficiencies and better delivering for members, I would argue that there are some really concerning interventions and inclusions in this schedule that should raise a lot of alarm bells. I recommend the government go back to the drawing board on schedule 3 and re-engage with stakeholders. 17:32 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Universal superannuation is a great Labor reform. It's one that we're proud of. It is not only making a difference to people's lives in their retirement; importantly, it's a ballast for our national economy. We are the envy of the world, with $3 trillion in superannuation funds to make an extraordinary difference to our national economy so that at a time of crisis there is a pool of national savings that helps to create jobs and helps to provide that certainty in our national economy, particularly during times of difficulty, as we're seeing with the pandemic. The truth is that this pool of savings has helped Australia during this crisis and has helped to stop predator hedge funds hoovering up distressed Australian businesses during the COVID pandemic. Superannuation is safeguarding both Australian workers and Australia's national sovereignty. The coalition have never believed in universal super. They opposed it at the beginning, and they continue to undermine it each and every time they have an opportunity. Those opposite aren't true conservatives. They don't have respect for institutions. They're vandals when it comes to attacking the institution of superannuation. Raids on super during the pandemic meant that people were robbing their own futures. We have 600,000 people who will be left with zero in their superannuation accounts because the government refused to provide them with other support. Casual workers, particularly younger people, were encouraged to take money out of their super, which will not only have a negative effect on their retirement income down the track; it will also make an enormous difference to our national economy, because it will place greater burden on future budgets. This is a government that had $1 trillion in debt. It gets worse over coming years, rising to $1.1 trillion then $1.2 trillion then $1.3 trillion. They have no plan on those issues. What they have a plan for, though, is to continue to undermine our superannuation system. Every single increase in super has been opposed by the coalition. This Prime Minister is trying to cut your super. Most cynically in recent times, out of all the attacks that have occurred on superannuation, was when the government announced a plan to let the victims of domestic violence raid their own superannuation to fund their own escapes from violent relationships. This would have made them victims twice over: not only victims of domestic and family violence but victims in terms of paying for their own escape down the track—reducing their own savings. They did scrap that plan, after heavy criticism. But you just know that, given a chance, it will be back. It will be back because they don't get it. They just don't understand superannuation. This Prime Minister has a tin ear, and we know he has a heart of stone. We also know that, at a time where they discovered they probably should have a women's budget statement, they re-introduced it, after they abolished it in 2014 when, I kid you not, Tony Abbott was the then minister for women as well as Prime Minister. We had the extraordinary circumstances during that debate where they wanted to undermine superannuation further and place further pressure on the victims of domestic violence. One of the things that we know that occurs in domestic violence situations is further intimidation of the victims. Can you imagine the pressure that would have been placed by perpetrators—who, by their very definition, are people who don't have ethics about placing pressure on women—saying, 'You go and raid your super.' It's extraordinary that this government doesn't get it. But this government, of course, does want Australians to retire with less. They want Australians to work without proper compensation, having frozen wages effectively for eight years. Over the next four years, wages are actually going to go down. What is their argument about superannuation and wages? These frauds opposite argue that somehow there's a connection that if you have less super then you'll have higher wages. The problem with that is that during the last eight years you've had stagnant wages at the same time as they've held off and broken commitments that they took to the 2013 election and the 2016 election that they would not freeze super. Of course, in 2019, they tried to do that as well. Now they've had a little back-off, just on the eve of the next federal election. But we know that they're opposed to the increase up to 12 per cent in superannuation. This is a government that has presided over and brought down a budget that will have lower wages, low growth, low productivity and lower workforce participation. What a quadrella from this government. The fact is that when super was increased from four per cent to nine per cent, wages increased. They increased during that period. But under this government, of course, we've had stagnant wages and stagnant superannuation. The truth is that superannuation also provides a boost to our national economy. The truth is that the savings that can go into infrastructure investment, that can go into investment, that can go into strengthening our national sovereignty—that is something that should be applauded by those opposite. But instead of that we have this rubbish legislation that's before the House here. This bill follows on from their budget and introduces three elements. The first is a new system to staple individual members to a single super account. Imagine what will happen there. Imagine the big banks going out there, offering a product, signing someone up, saying, 'We can give you this account, rather than industry super.' They'd had it with industry super, because it's too successful. It's too successful. Remember the big review they had—industry super versus retail funds? What's more successful? Industry super. They had a whole royal commission. Here it is: a royal commission into the banking superannuation and financial services industry. What did they find? They found all sorts of shenanigans in the banking industry and all sorts of shonky activities in financial services, but what they found with industry super was good returns for members. But, because there's a connection, a proud connection, with the trade union movement, they're against it and, therefore, they just attack it. But what they want is to have that stapling of accounts so that if you're stuck in an account that isn't delivering or in an account that has high fees then you're in there for life. The second element is a new system to test the performance of certain funds. But, of course, what this bill, as it's currently drafted, does is introduce performance benchmarks that penalise a fund for investing in unlisted Australian assets such that Australian super savings can actually go to the United States but not be used here. Gee, isn't that smart? The bill also proposes to lock members into underperforming dud funds. A young worker who enters the super system for the first time may find themselves locked into that poor fund as they get older. The bill also ignores admin fees in the performance benchmarks. Can you imagine that? It just ignore them. It gives a green light to bad funds to increase their admin charges at the expense of member accumulation. Despite their being the so-called champions of the market and free enterprise and boardroom sovereignty, the thing that should torpedo this legislation more than any other is the measure that gives the bloke who sits over there, the Treasurer of Australia, the right to veto an investment that a superannuation board considers to be in the interest of their members. Think about what the Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia did in vetoing funding from the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility to a windfarm that would have created 250 jobs in North Queensland. He intervened and vetoed it. No problem. Nothing to see here. What they want to do is allow a Treasurer to determine what a board does. You hear from those opposite when it comes to super: it's the people's money. This bloke thinks it's his money! This Treasurer wants to control what happens in individual super accounts throughout the entire country. It is absurd. We know, with the political interference and the views of those opposite, that they'll be vetoing renewable energy projects. We know they'll be vetoing projects they don't agree with, unlike the superannuation funds and the role they play in infrastructure investment in this country, whether it be public transport projects, like the Gold Coast light rail—the possibility that you had there in terms of investment in our ports. I mean, this mob—and we had a bit of a debate today about national sovereignty—couldn't stop a Chinese-government-linked entity buying Darwin's port, but they want to stop superannuation funds of Australian workers owning ports around Australia! That's their view. What a farce! On this bill, as to this provision, I've got to say: in a totalitarian state is where it belongs. It's a provision that allows a Treasurer to veto funds that are not government funds and veto where they invest their money. That is something that occurs in totalitarian states, not in a democracy like Australia. And that is why this bill should be rejected. Look at the impact of this bill. You would think that this bill, if it were really positive, would actually have a positive impact on growth. But have a look at it. It's a $46-million impact on the budget—not lifting it; driving it down! It's another masterstroke by these so-called economic managers. 'Economic managers'! They've given up on fiscal policy. They treated Australians like mugs when they came in here and said that the budget was already in surplus, when it wasn't. They got elected promising a surplus in their first year and every year after. But they always seek to undermine Australian national economic sovereignty. They did that when they drove car-makers offshore. They did that when we lost 90,000 jobs in manufacturing. They're doing that by ignoring, instead of embracing, the opportunities that would come from dealing with climate change and, in doing so, creating jobs and driving down energy prices as well as emissions. They're also doing that in undermining superannuation for ideological reasons. They just don't like the fact that workers can own capital—that workers can be in that position. For the first time, we're a net exporter rather than an importer of capital, because of the strength of our superannuation funds. And thank you, Paul Keating, for this reform and for this vision. This is a proud Labor vision, superannuation. We will defend it. We will argue for it, because it's in the interests of workers but also in the interests of our nation. The fact is: those opposite can't be trusted. They are not on the side of Australian workers. We, in the Labor Party, are on your side. That's what we say to those people who understand how important superannuation is to the quality of their retirement and to our national economy. 17:48 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I rise to speak on the merits of this bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021, and to document some ongoing concerns I have with its provisions. As an Independent, I have the privilege of assessing each bill that comes through this place on its individual merits, and this bill is no exception. I've also made sure I've consulted deeply on this bill. I've heard from constituents and small businesses across Indi about super reform, including through an online budget survey which received over 1,400 responses from my constituents just last week. I've met with representatives from various super funds who would be immediately affected by these reforms. And I've met with the minister responsible for this bill, to ask her about the evidence, upon which the government is relying to justify these reforms, from the Productivity Commission, the Senate inquiry, the royal commission and industry consultations. On the whole, straight up: this is not necessarily a bad bill. It seeks to prevent workers from racking up multiple super accounts and unnecessary fees. It creates an ambitious performance test, to make sure our precious retirement savings are not squandered away in poorly performing funds with no accountability. It also sets up an online tool that would make it easier for workers to assess how well their fund is doing and make an informed choice about whether to invest elsewhere. These are all well-intentioned reforms that I can support. But there are parts of this bill, particularly the directions powers given to the Treasurer in schedule 3, which I simply cannot support, on behalf of the communities of Indi. I know there are members on both sides, including the government back benches, who share these concerns and I commend them for doing so publicly in the House. I'll now turn briefly to each schedule. Schedule 1 introduces a new stapling system which will ensure that workers keep the first super account they open unless they make a proactive decision to change. Unstapling is a good thing if it's done right. Australians pay $30 billion per year in super fees which are among the highest in the world. More than one in five Australians have unintended multiple accounts, and some estimates have Australians wasting up to $6.5 billion per year on avoidable costs and fees. So we should be doing all we can to stop this dreadful waste. But the fact of the matter is you can't staple people to their existing funds overnight and expect to solve that problem. The Productivity Commission explicitly recommended that super funds be subject to performance testing before introducing stapling, and there's an important reason for this: we shouldn't be stapling workers to an underperforming fund. Current Treasury estimates suggest 21 out of 77 MySuper products currently held by around three million Australians would fail the performance test. We also know Australians are sticky decision-makers when it comes to their super. If we staple three million people to underperforming funds, we risk keeping them stapled for years to come, especially if performance testing doesn't work out as expected or if people don't end up using the comparison tool, like we've seen with other government-run comparison tools—for example, in the energy market. Sure, the Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority publishes heat maps that show economists and other experts how well funds are performing; but those maps are buried in 1,000-page reports deep in government websites. No worker is looking them up. At the end of the day, stapling before performance testing doesn't kill this bill, but it sure makes it a risky one. We're essentially banking on a lot of ducks falling into place down the track to make sure that this bill works properly. A better bill would have mandated testing for two years before stapling, and I'll support any detailed amendments to that effect. But I won't oppose the bill on this basis. I've also heard a number of other concerns about schedule 1, including the administrative burden it will place on the ATO to have stapling ready to go in just four weeks time; the possible impact of stapling on workers in high-risk industries; and the risk that stapling will encourage super funds to engage in predatory marketing, with young people signing up in their first job so that the funds get them for life. I'm less worried about these concerns and, on balance, could support schedule 1, amended or unamended. Schedule 2 establishes a new performance test that goes beyond the current CPI-plus industry benchmark. If funds fail this new test, they will face a number of consequences. If they fail the test repeatedly, they'll be prevented from signing up new members and eventually driven out of the market. Again, performance testing is a good thing if done right. For example, it wasn't until a few weeks ago that the government decided to include administrative fees as part of the performance testing. This exclusion created a concerning loophole that would have allowed unscrupulous super funds to game the performance-testing system. So I was pleased to see that change. But my biggest concern with this part of the bill is that the performance test will apply predominantly to industry super funds first, before the retail funds. I've spoken to a few members in this place who are reading the tea leaves here, suggesting that the government wants to create a run on industry based funds. This may be true or it may not be true, but one thing is clear: we can't have rules for some and not for others, not when the stakes and figures are this high. There's over $818 billion in assets under management in industry funds and over $630 billion in retail funds. The data is there right now to performance-test all products. There should be no excuse. I'll be pleased to support any detailed amendments that fix this oversight; and, if it's not fixed, I'll work with colleagues in this place to put pressure on the government to do so through immediate regulations. But schedule 3 of the bill is a whole other beast. Section 117A has been criticised by members on both sides of the House, and I wish to add my voice to that chorus. That section would give the Treasurer a broad and unilateral power to block certain kinds of investments super funds are making purely because the Treasurer believes they're not in the members' best financial interests. We're talking about pure political decision-making here. This power could be used to strike out clean investments in renewables overnight without justification. It could be used to defund important corporate social responsibility programs that promote women in executive leadership or create cultural diversity on ASX 200 boards. The truth is though we have no idea how this power would be used, and it would create an unacceptable level of sovereign risk in a $3 trillion financial industry that no-one has asked for and could be totally avoided. I cannot find one recommendation, one report, one stakeholder, one local business or even one constituent who supports this provision. Whatever the rationale, it's simply unacceptable to me. APRA currently has broad powers to intervene when super funds are not acting in their members' best financial interest. APRA makes its decisions based on fiduciary duty, not political whim and opportunity. If the government believes that APRA could be better equipped to enforce that power independently, then it should support it to do so—not call it in and turn independent regulation into a political playground. I've see no reason to support schedule 3, and it's on this basis that I will be opposing this bill. Before I conclude, I'd like to speak briefly about the superannuation reforms that are not in this bill that the government has floated in recent months. Earlier this year, there was the inane suggestion that women fleeing domestic violence could dip into their super to access emergency funds to help them move into safer temporary accommodation, access psychological support services, cover lost income from time-off and so on. This suggestion is offensive on so many levels. Victims of domestic violence should not have to bear the financial burden of escaping a situation which was not of their doing. That is unnecessarily punitive and callous. It also totally misunderstands the experience of women facing these horrific circumstances. No person fleeing domestic and family violence would have the psychological bandwidth and patience to wade through the necessary paperwork. The average Australian doesn't know who their super is with and what their balance is let alone in the middle of a crisis. And the average woman in Australia retires with 47 per cent less super than men in this country. A big part of that is the result of the gender pay gap but it's also because the government has missed some opportunities for more productive ways to empower women through superannuation reform. Right now employers are not obliged to make super contributions to women on maternity leave under the paid parental leave scheme. That's a straight up lost opportunity and straight up discrimination. I welcome the government's decision to abandon the $450 minimum threshold super contributions on budget night, but I believe the government could have gone much further for women, and I really encourage them to do so, just like I encouraged the government to take a close look at the deficiencies in this bill and correct them, so that MPs on both sides of this House, including the government's own backbench, can support it. 17:58 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I rise to speak on this legislation, Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021. Every day Australian's expect their superannuation fund to work as hard as they do. That is why the Morrison government is introducing a suite of reforms to ensure the superannuation system meets the demands of the modern workforce and is always working to promote member outcomes. This legislation will ensure the sustainability of the superannuation system going forward by promoting efficiency and guaranteeing the retirement saving goals of Australians and ensuring they protect against vested interest from those who manage their money. In total, this package will save Australians $17.9 billion over 10 years. That's almost $5 million of benefits each day. This legislation is centred around three key elements. Schedule 1: firstly, we are limiting the creation of multiple superannuation accounts for employees who do not choose a superannuation fund when they start a new job. The amendment specifies that in the situation where a new employee fails to nominate a fund to receive contributions but it is identified that an employee has a stapled superannuation account, then contributions must be made to that stapled superannuation account. Only if a stapled fund cannot be identified may the employer make contributions on behalf of their employee to the employer's chosen default fund. Likewise, employers cannot make contributions in accordance with a workplace determination or enterprise agreement unless a stapled fund cannot be identified. We are introducing these changes following feedback from stakeholders and recommendations from the Productivity Commission's report Superannuation: assessing efficiency and competitiveness—recommendation 1—and the final report of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry—recommendation 3.5. Currently, if an employee does not choose a fund, their employer must satisfy the superannuation guarantee by making contributions on behalf of their employee to the employer's chosen default fund. However, in the Productivity Commission's report, it was identified that this law led to unintended multiple accounts, which it called a 'structural flaw' of the superannuation system. It fails to meet the demands of a modern workplace, where people routinely change jobs. It also erodes member balances through unnecessary fees and insurance. In fact, I had the experience myself, with a number of different superannuation funds and a number of different fees being paid across all of these different super funds. So I'm actually someone who had this exact thing happen in my life, being someone who worked part time and in different jobs across my professional career. In sum, it is not user friendly and is not serving Australians as well as it should be—in particular, women, since they are more adversely affected because they often have part-time jobs and are working in a number of different jobs. The Hayne royal commission identified the same issues. Secondly, looking at schedule 2, we will require APRA to conduct an annual performance test for superannuation products. Beneficiaries must be notified if their product has failed the performance test. Should a product fail its performance test in two consecutive years, the trustee will be prohibited from accepting new beneficiaries. This amendment is also in line with recommendations from the Productivity Commission, which identified that consistently underperforming funds undermine the superannuation system and, ultimately, the hardworking Australians it is designed to serve. The intention is to assess the performance of superannuation products against an objective benchmark. This will be done by the creation of the government's new, interactive Your Super comparison tool. This will ensure greater transparency for beneficiaries and protection from underperforming funds which compromise their retirement savings goals. The YourSuper tool is expected to boost retirement savings by $3.3 billion over 10 years. It is also important to stress that this amendment is not a toothless tiger. As noted, there are serious consequences for failing the performance test twice: the trustee is prohibited from accepting new beneficiaries. There is also schedule 3. We are looking to tighten the rules and regulations governing the trustees and directors of superannuation funds, including self-managed super funds, to ensure they are held to a higher professional and legal standard and are always acting in the best interest of the beneficiaries. Among other things, this includes mandating that trustees and directors of superannuation funds exercise their powers in the best financial interest of their beneficiaries. It also involves tightening record-keeping obligations contained in regulations by making contraventions a strict liability offence. This provides regulators with an additional option to respond to compliance issues relating to record-keeping requirements. Under existing arrangements, trustees and directors are required to promote the financial interests of the beneficiaries, but this obligation lacks clarity and has allowed trustees' and directors' misconduct to fester, as was made apparent in the Hayne royal commission. In line with recommendations from the Productivity Commission—in particular, recommendation 22 of the Productivity Commission's superannuation inquiry—this amendment imposes a clearly articulated, unambiguous and stringent obligation on trustees and directors to act in the best financial interests of beneficiaries. Given the compulsory nature of the superannuation system, Australians expect and deserve their funds to be handled in a way that is centred on securing the best possible outcomes for them. This legislation forms part of the Morrison government's suite of superannuation reforms, which are firmly centred on ensuring Australians have the best opportunity to be financially secure in retirement. After all, that's what this great system has been built for. We are providing targeted, tangible and practical measures to provide choice and control in superannuation. We've scrapped exit fees that stopped Australians accessing their own money. We've capped the fees on low-balance accounts of less than $,6000. We've bolstered the ability of older Australians who are nearing retirement to streamline their super, allowing them to make up to three years of voluntary contributions in a single year. We've also introduced legislation through the Australian Taxation Office to more proactively reunite the amount of a rollover fund with a member, where they have an active superannuation account. This is all about ensuring the long-term sustainability of the superannuation system, which can only be achieved by ensuring it keeps on working for its members. I'm particularly proud that we've also made real and tangible adjustments to superannuation for women. The low-income superannuation tax offset has benefited over 1.9 million women since 1 July 2017. The government's superannuation payment of up to $500 to help low-income earners save for retirement has seen over $500 million in super contributions made to eligible women who earn less than $37,000 a year. We've also introduced catch-up concessional contributions. These allow women who may have taken time off over a financial year to have a child or look after a sick loved one to make up their personal superannuation contribution amount in the following financial year. Last year, during the COVID 19 pandemic, Australians were also allowed to use their superannuation to support them financially through what the world would say were unprecedented times. As the Prime Minister said in March last year when announcing the policy, it is their money, after all. The initiative allowed those financially affected by the pandemic last year to access up to $10,000 of their superannuation early. There was no tax payable on superannuation released under this arrangement, and Centrelink and Veterans' Affairs payments were not affected. It certainly helped a number of my constituents get through a very difficult time, in addition to the other support mechanisms that the Morrison government rolled out, such as the well-known JobKeeper and other initiatives. This enabled more than 3½ million Australians to access their money when they needed it most. For some in my electorate of Higgins this temporary arrangement proved to be a lifeline and helped to keep them afloat during difficult times. Let's hope with the recent Melbourne outbreak that we are going to have a very short lockdown and that we don't have to deal with the financial distresses that were faced by Victorians last year. On the surface, this legislation may seem complex. However, at its core the goal of this legislation is simple: ensuring superannuation funds work as hard as Australians do. Since superannuation was introduced almost 30 years ago the landscape has changed. The system now holds almost $3 trillion in savings. We are introducing these reforms to ensure it can meet the challenges of the modern workforce and is transparent and user friendly. Importantly, these changes will ensure superannuation funds are always working in the financial interests of their members and not in their own. I commend this bill to the House. 18:08 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy I sit under a big picture of Black Jack McEwen and Red Ted Theodore. Black Jack McEwen said the important thing in government—the most important thing in government—is to get it right. Education is no replacement for hard work and getting it right. I don't wish to denigrate other members of parliament, but the standard of debate on this bill has been very, very low indeed. Honourable members interjecting— Mr KATTER HX4 If you listen to me, you might just know a little tiny bit about it. I made my living, for six years before I went into parliament, selling superannuation. I did very well out of it, thank you. I'm very proud of the contracts that I sold. Up until the 1990s—the start of the free market economics that dominate this parliament to this very day—there was a 60-40 rule: 60 per cent of all superannuation went into government securities. So it should. I mean, you put it away for your retirement. You've saved all of your life to get a benefit, and if it's not there when you retire, there's going to be a lot of heartbreak: you work all your life to retire, but you can't retire. That was the idea of the 60 per cent going into government securities: so that you knew you had security for your retirement. Unless the government was going to go bankrupt, you had security in your retirement. I had agencies with a very, very prudential corporation, and they were all stodgy investors—very, very stodgy. I was marketing AMP investment plans. They were tailor-made investment plans, but the contract was with the AMP. With an ALA contract with the AMP society you put in $2½ thousand a year and, with bonuses, after 50 years, when you hit retirement age, you would get $1 million. Now, I put—we all put—$23,000 a year into our compulsory superannuation. I get back $1 million, if I want a lump sum. So I put in $23,000 and get $1 million. On the ALA, I put in $2½ thousand and got back a million dollars. The last speaker talked about how wonderfully these funds perform. If you go back to the AMP—my wife has a contract with the AMP, and her retirement fund is less now than it was three years ago. I'm not privy to it, but I presume she's putting $1,000 in a year or something, or whatever it is, but it's going down, not up. Let's say I was putting in $4,000 a year for 50 years. That's $200,000, but I was going to get a million dollars out of that. Well, she's putting the same amount of money in, and it's going down, not up. Why is it going down? Well, because the CEO class runs the world. Everyone in this place should have read Piketty's book on how the world is not divided up between haves and have nots, as some of the people on my right here on the Labor Party believe. Sorry, you're wrong. The world is divided up into the CEO class—of which a lot of you are members, and a lot on the other side of the chamber are as well, of course. The CEO class runs and owns the world. If they choose to pay themselves $20 million a year, then they pay themselves $20 million a year. They are really answerable to nobody except themselves. Most of the CEOs are paying themselves over $12 million a year, and I'm talking about hundreds of companies in Australia where they are paying themselves that sort of money. Do they know anything about the stock market? Well, I came through in the age of the mineral boom. My girlfriend, now my wife, bought shares in Toledo copper. She said, 'Would you like to have a look at the prospectus and tell me whether it's a good investment?' Well, they got $6 million off the stock market, and I read through their prospectus. At that stage I was very knowledgeable in that field. I had worked on my own mines and was about to leave university and start working my own mines, so I knew what I was doing. I burst out laughing. She said: 'How much copper have they got? What's the value?' I said, 'I've got more copper in my pocket than they have got in their reserves—it's third rate, $6 million!' At that point in time, I knew that I loved the stock market. It is the greatest invention in human history for smart country boys to take money off dumb rich boys. It is beautiful. I loved it. I was quickly floating my own mining company for $6 million, which is $20 million in terms of today's money, and all these dumb beggars were going to invest. In actual fact, I did have reserves, but they're investing in the stock market. Who's investing? I read an article by a very famous commentator, Santamaria, one of the most powerful and influential figures in Australian history. He had a column in The Australian newspaper. He said: 'There are people investing in superannuation funds who are earning hundreds of thousands of dollars a year and who are in their 30s. They are investing hundreds of millions of dollars.' I thought: 'This old bloke's lost his marbles. I'm not reading his column anymore.' So I stopped reading it. And then, two years later, Nick Leeson destroyed one of the biggest banks in the world. Santamaria was wrong, because he wasn't in his 30s; he was in his 20s. Santamaria was wrong, because he said they were on hundreds of thousands; he was on millions of dollars a year. Santamaria was wrong, because he said he was investing hundreds of millions of dollars. No, he wasn't; he was investing billions of dollars. So Santamaria was wrong on every single issue! I couldn't believe it. Seriously, this bloke, in his 20s, was investing billions of dollars and paying himself virtually what he liked—millions of dollars a year. Barings Bank had been there for 400 years, and he blew it to pieces. That is what is going on on a continuous basis. All of your retirement funds are going into superannuation companies that are investing it in the stock market. If you could tell me some young 'smart-A' out of university with a double degree and honours or something like that is investing on the stock market, what the hell would he know about a mining company or its reserves? He couldn't read a prospectus. But that's not really the major part of their investment. Fifty-one per cent of their investment is into the stock market. For those who like studying these things, what you're talking about here is a roulette wheel. These young masters of economics out of business schools in universities wouldn't have a clue what they're investing in. But that's what they're doing: they're investing in the stock market, which is a roulette wheel—well, maybe a Ponzi scheme, because, if they keep investing in it, each year the value of the shares go up because more and more people are buying them each year. So it's a giant Ponzi scheme. But I don't think anyone in this place is so ignorant as not to know what happens in a Ponzi scheme—eventually, it blows up. Fifty-one per cent is going to the Ponzi scheme. Thirty per cent is going into property. Property may not be a roulette wheel, but it most certainly is a Ponzi scheme. In fact, if we stop the about 400,000 people coming into Australia a year—and now they have stopped—according to what I can see, the property market falls through the floor. What happens then? All your superannuation is invested in the property market. The stock market has collapsed on numerous occasions in Australian history—in the eighties and the nineties—and it will again. So too bad for you if you retire when the stock market has crashed through the floor. Turn the clock back to when wise men ran this country. Wise and thoughtful people ran this country. They said, '60 per cent went into government securities.' In Queensland, that money was used to build the railway lines into the coalfields. Australia's economy has been carried on the coal truck now for 70 years, and it's still being carried by the coal truck. There's also an iron ore truck as well now. But half of Australia's income is from iron ore and half is from coal. There are also other things, so let me be very specific. Coal's about $70 billion a year. The next one down might be gold, about $12 billion a year; might be cattle, about $12 billion a year; might be aluminium, although that's doomed because of the price of electricity, but it's about $12 billion to $15 billion a year. So you've just got these two giants, and that giant is there because of the 60-40 rule. We could get the investment money to build the railway line for George Ishimura, for Utah and for Les Thiess. Once that railway line was built, we were able to export coal. Australia was a coal-importing nation until that investment money became available and created the coal industry. Half of Australia's agriculture comes from dams, and if I look at agriculture as a whole I'm talking about $60 billion or $70 billion there. Where does most of that come from? Dams. Where'd the money come from to build the dams? It came from superannuation. Now there's no money for dams because there's no superannuation money. It's all spinning around on the roulette wheel. It's all in the Ponzi schemes. It's not being used by intelligent, thoughtful people to be invested wisely in something that is a benefit to the planet as well as to Australia. We have an aluminium industry because that money was used to build the biggest power station in the world and because we had a government that believed Australia should own the assets. In Queensland, we took one per cent of the coal for free. We had a reserve resource policy, and God bless the West Australians because they still have a reserve resource policy. We gave away the gas, which is worth about $50 billion or $60 billion a year. We sell it for 6c and we Australians buy our own gas back for $16. That's smart, that was a good deal! Qatar exports the same amount of gas as Australia. Qatar gets $39 billion out of it. Australia gets $4 billion a year out of it. I mean, who's smart, Qatar or Australia? Honourable members interjecting— Mr KATTER HX4 Well, whatever the correct pronunciation is. I'm just an ignorant Cloncurry boy. I wouldn't know about how you pronounce all these big words. This place has decided that people out there can invest that money any way they like. They've got a bunch of nobodies out of university who wouldn't know whether their backside was on fire on a dark night and wouldn't be able to change a bicycle tyre, and yet they are going to decide that this mining investment is a good investment, or that Christopher Skase company is a great investment. They decided that Christopher Skase was a good investment. He flew them in his big Boeing 747 for dinner up on his big yacht at Mooloolaba, and they thought, 'Oh, well, are we going to question him about security for his companies?' Of course they were not. They were impressed by all of this. I hate to tell you, but your money's going on a roulette wheel and into a Ponzi scheme. I've given the warning. If people don't take it, at least the historical record will read I tried to tell them. The 60-40 rule put there by 'Red Ted' Theodore, put there by Jack McEwen— (Time expired) 18:23 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash I can't entertain you the way that you've just been entertained by the member for Kennedy. His contribution is always worthwhile. He did finish with those immortal words, 'Jack McEwen'. I think he began there and he finished there, and I've enjoyed his contributions to this parliament for as long as I've been here and he's been here. But I do have my own story to tell because, for those of you that are new to this place, I was here when the superannuation scheme in Australia was introduced between 1990 and 1993 by the Keating government, and there's always more to the story. At that time, we had a leader named John Hewson and a package called Fightback. I had probably 23 people on the staff of the business I was in then. When super was introduced, as far as they were concerned it was the greatest thing that had ever happened. You've got to remember that in those days—before I come to the story—parliamentarians and public servants had superannuation and some of the merchant class in Australia had superannuation directed by their accountants, but overall it was probably only one per cent of Australians that had superannuation. And here was I, as an employer, having to commit to my staff's future. I tell you: my staff loved it. They thought it was the bee's knees, especially when I was paying. They thought it was great. Because all my staff were under a federal award, there was no reduction—they said, 'There'll be a reduction in the pay you give to your employees,' but there was no reduction in pay going to employees. There was just an absolute direct benefit to those employees. When I finished in that business, in 2003, the real benefits of what I'd done over those years were received by the employees that were still there, all those years later. Superannuation was hailed as an amazing reform for the country. There were those on my side that did not support that type of change to legislation and didn't support small business having to pay for it. We had all the arguments. Yes, there were many on my side that opposed it, but I was living it, which is quite different to standing in this place. I was living it with my staff, and I knew how they felt about this new superannuation scheme. So Fightback came along, and John Hewson, who I have great regard for now—and he had regard for my wisdom, even at that young age—asked me to stay back a couple of weeks before they released it and said, 'Would you have a look at Fightback, go through it piece by piece and tell me what you think?' I got to the line that said, 'We're abolishing compulsory superannuation.' John came over to us, and I said: 'You can't do this. This is politically not on. My staff love this. They may even be Liberal-National voters; I don't know, but they're not going to enjoy this.' He said, 'The trouble is, Broadbent, you've got no'—I won't mention what he suggested I didn't have. I said, 'Well, if you introduce this you won't have anything.' We had a big discussion about it, and it was taken out of Fightback. So there's always more to the story. Superannuation continued from that time. We've gone from naught in superannuation for those people to a $3 trillion bucket of money now. I understand what the member for Kennedy is saying about how that money is invested, but a lot of that money is also invested in very good public infrastructure or in major building works, like office buildings, and they are performing well. I have chosen to manage my own super. People still think that every member of parliament gets a superannuation payout when they leave anyway. An honourable member interjecting— Mr BROADBENT MT4 Yes, go on. Good one! No. I was there in 2004. I came back in 2004, when somebody out-Latham-ed Latham. The payouts didn't continue. There was a history of them, though, and they were very good for many parliamentarians. What Menzies said when he introduced the scheme was, 'We won't pay you much while you're here, but we'll look after you after you go.' That was the intention. Some politicians I know, after being here for a while, struggled greatly after being in politics, because you're not quite as loved afterwards as people think you will be. Having been here once or twice, I'm quite knowledgeable on these issues. So we have this system. If you decide that parts of it are not working well, governments have the right to deliver legislation on behalf of who? There is only one group of people that the Liberals and Nationals are interested in here—and I know the Labor Party and the Greens and the Independents are too—that is, the members of those organisations that give their hard-earned into a superannuation fund for the benefit that comes back to them. That's what we're here for. We're here for the people who receive the benefits of the original intent of superannuation. The original intent was not only to give individuals wealth in their older years. It was not only to reduce older people's reliance on the pension. It was to build a fund of money that can be invested in this nation for the benefit of the broader Australian people. For me, they were the three parts to it, and I've never lost sight of where we should be going with it. Parts of this legislation have been criticised. I was warned by the whip not to criticise anything the government is doing in this particular speech. I got the message and I certainly won't be doing that, so I'll concentrate on the very positive parts of this legislation. The positive parts are what the bill will achieve on behalf of the people that we represent, which are the beneficiaries of superannuation in this nation—all of those people who wouldn't otherwise have the benefit of superannuation. But there are two sides to the story. There are two sides to every story. When this pandemic hit and the opportunity was given to people to go to their super for a benefit, I know people who had no other alternative but to go to their super. They had no other alternative but to go to their super, and it was a lifesaver for them to be able to go to their super. I'd love to think that in a better world they wouldn't have had to and that there would have been a benefit that would have been supplied to them by the government or their employer or however, but it was a lifesaver for those people to be able to go to their super once or twice during COVID. Yes, there will be people who have to start all over again from a nil base. But what I like about this is that for the first time the employer can't just shove the money where they want to shove the money or have an agreement with a particular superannuation fund that every default will go to them. They'll actually have to ask: is there somebody that you've already got superannuation money with? It will be up to the employer to find where they're going to put the money for the new employee. Therefore, the benefit accrues to whom? Once again, to the individual person that we're in this parliament for. We're not going to forget that we're not here for the executive officers of these super funds. We're not here for them. We're not here for the benefit of those who work within it. We're not here for them. In fact, we put legislation around that to control what they're doing as best we can, as this legislation does. No, we're actually here for those people who know that they're going get a benefit along the track if the managers of that super fund do the right thing and have them as a focus the whole time—and have some talent and ability to get the best outcome for their clients. That would be their only focus. That's what I'm focused on tonight. It is suggested that the savings will be $17.9 billion over 10 years. That's almost $5 million of benefits each day with these changes. Every day $5 million more will be going into the pockets of Australians from their efforts. I'm sitting next to another businessman who knows exactly what I'm talking about and who has employed a whole lot of people, as I have. There are very few of us in the House, but we know what it means to our employees. If we can deliver $5 million a day, every day, into the hands of Australians through superannuation, this legislation is worth every bit of the work we put in tonight. It's billions. It's a big, big industry. We want them to manage the funds correctly. This legislation goes to do that. We've taken the challenge to actually make changes to super, where no-one has accepted the challenge in the past because the super managers have said: 'We're too big. You can't touch us. We will tear you to pieces. We have the power. We will take out ads. We will be on 3AW threatening your government. We'll go to every one of our superannuation policyholders or clients and we'll say, "Don't vote for these people, because they're ripping off your super."' I just want to tell the members of those super funds: we're doing this legislation to give you another $5 million every day. Five million dollars every day will go into your super funds, into your pockets, into your future. And it's not just about them; it's about generations of Australians, especially those that came here after the war and invested in a second house and were so frightened about negative gearing at the last election. As the member for Kennedy knows, that group of people might include construction workers with no skills or farm workers with no skills, but they've still got superannuation. Who is it for? That generation were never worried about themselves. It was always the kids—whether they were Vietnamese, Dutch, Greeks, Italians or Yugoslavs, as they were called in those days. None of you are old enough to remember that. For those people, it was all about their kids. Everything they ever did was about their kids. What we do to our peril, as politicians, is threaten that generation. They're a silent group in our community. They don't make noises. They have festivals and things, but they don't make noises. But they vote. Don't threaten the hard work that they've done over the generations, and super was a part of that. Don't threaten that, because their whole dream was not for themselves; it was for their children and their grandchildren. I know some of those families—they've actually married into my broader family. They haven't changed. Their focus is still on their children and their grandchildren. Any super they earned they've still got, and they want it to go to the next generation. I know it was designed to be spent while you're alive. Try and tell them that. It's accrued wealth, as far as they're concerned, and it's their accrued wealth. That accrued wealth is to go to their children and grandchildren. They will work as hard as they possibly can, as they did prewar and postwar. They're the people that built this country, and they're watching everything we do when it comes to their finances. Do not threaten them. Thank you for the opportunity to say there's always more to the story. 18:38 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde It is a pleasure to follow the contribution of my colleague and his references to my comments. It is instructive to revisit and to understand better the history of superannuation. Many in this place will know that I had a long career in banking and financial services before I entered this place. I understand this space well and appreciate the importance and value of the superannuation system to our economy. As the member for Kennedy and my colleague have outlined, the importance of superannuation to our economy can't be understated. It is now an investment pool of some $3 trillion, invested in a wide range of assets—in the Australian share market, the property market, cash, fixed interest, international investments, infrastructure, agriculture—I will say I sometimes feel like our superannuation industry doesn't invest enough in our agricultural sector and they could maybe take the opportunity to have a look at some of the very good agricultural assets that have been on the chopping block or the selling block of late and maybe have made a more committed effort to keep those assets in Australian hands rather than see them purchased by foreign entities. That being said, ultimately the importance of what our superannuation industry does is it seeks to provide a hope for the future of Australians, and it's there to complement our age pension system. Whilst the original goal and desire of our superannuation system was to see the reliance on the age pension decline over time, I think our Retirement Income Review has made it quite clear that that's not going to happen to the extent that we thought it would. But it's a combination of those two things that I think is critically important. This bill, particularly schedule 1, where we're talking about ensuring that a person has a single superannuation fund that is going to be there with them for their lifetime, I think is critically important. In my life prior to coming into this place, I had many an occasion where I had clients come to see me who had multiple superannuation funds. The best I remember was eight. It took us the best part of nine months of work to amalgamate those eight funds into a single fund that the client could then utilise for their future. That involved a number of things, not just looking at amalgamating the balance of the fund but importantly also ensuring that with the insurance policies and other protections that were in those various funds that the client was no worse off, that they kept the same levels of cover, that they weren't paying double premiums—all of those things. What I hope with this legislation and this notion that a person has a single superannuation fund is that we don't see that issue arise again, because all those things do is erode the value and the benefits that those members are going to receive at some point in the future when they retire. My colleague mentioned in his contribution a saving of some $5 million a day. I think that's an enormous amount to go back into individual members' superannuation funds. But it's also important to reflect on the range of things that this government has done over the past few years to ensure that we're protecting members' superannuation, and it's all designed to ensure that we maximise the benefits to members when they retire. We've sought to strengthen the powers of the regulator to deal with underperforming funds, and that's what this bill is, in part, designed to do. But, in addition, we've capped fees on low-balance accounts, which would help some seven million Australians save around $570 million in fees in the first year alone. We've banned exit fees from all superannuation accounts. I can remember when we were trying to amalgamate those eight funds, there were funds that did charge exit fees, which I think was completely unconscionable. For the first time ever we've provided the ATO with the power to proactively reunite low-balance inactive accounts with active accounts. I note in the contributions of those opposite that they didn't mention that there were some of their industry funds who sought to make those inactive accounts active again so they didn't have to be amalgamated. I also note that those opposite, in their contributions, failed to mention that, when last in government, they imposed some $9 billion of new taxes on super and, going into the last election, they were proposing to introduce an additional $34 billion of superannuation taxes. Through the work that this government is doing, we are seeking to ensure that the amount of superannuation that people can accumulate is to the maximum benefit for their retirement. The Retirement Income Review, which I referenced earlier, found that the Australian retirement income system is effective and sound and its costs broadly sustainable. But it observed that there is room for improvement. This bill is part of that continuous process of looking to improve the system. In the government's Your future, Your Super package, we are seeking to ensure that members' superannuation follows them when they change jobs. I've had clients who have had a personal superannuation account and then they've gone to work for another employer and weren't able to use that personal superannuation account that they already had, because the employer was tied, through an employment agreement or other agreement, to a particular superannuation fund. That was not necessarily to the benefit of that member, because in the superannuation fund that they already had set up they probably already had insurances and a range of other measures already in place that were planned and structured for their future, and now they were getting a second fund that didn't have those things or didn't have the capacity to have the levels of cover or other things that they wanted in it for their future. The bill introduces a new interactive online super comparison tool to empower members to make better decisions about who manages their retirement savings. The YourSuper comparison tool will help members compare and select superannuation products that best meets their needs. Importantly, the bill will hold funds to account for underperforming by introducing an annual performance test. These things are critically important for the future of the superannuation system, but particularly for the future of the members in the superannuation system, because, ultimately that is our focus—ensuring that the superannuation benefits that members are going to receive in retirement are maximised. I would argue—and I know the shadow minister is sitting at the table—that one of the other ways that members could achieve that is to seek professional advice. But what we in this place can do as legislators is ensure that the regulation for the superannuation system is fit for purpose. Many of the other things that we have done in this place have been about ensuring that we seek to achieve that. For example, in passing the Treasury Laws Amendment (Putting Members' Interests First) Bill, we ensured that those with low balances, below $6,000—often young people who do not really follow their superannuation fund or what's going on in their superannuation fund and get their annual statement and stick it in the bottom drawer and really forget about it—would not face the undue erosion of their superannuation balances through inappropriate insurance arrangements and inappropriate fees and charges. We've seen plenty of examples of that. I know, from looking at a variety of super funds over the years, that, when you actually look at the statement and it says that you're paying a premium for income protection, total and permanent impairment disability insurance or life insurance, you've got to read the fine print because, even though you may have had that cover in there and you were paying those premiums, that didn't necessarily mean that, in the event of something happening, you could make a claim or that you were eligible to make a claim even though you were paying the premium. So I'm proud of the fact that this government has sought to remove those impediments in the system to people accumulating superannuation balances for their retirement. We should be very proud that we are seeking to protect the value of members' balances. We've also been making changes to make super more flexible, reflecting the individual circumstances of everyday Australians. These changes will not prevent anyone who wants insurance within their super fund from being able to obtain it, but they need to opt in to obtain it in low-balance and young members accounts. I think that is critically important, because, as I've just touched on, insurance in superannuation will not always be what it's presented as being. We're also ensuring that we're keeping members' interests first and foremost during the coronavirus pandemic by allowing Australians access to their superannuation funds where necessary to get them through the coronavirus pandemic. I think that has been extraordinarily well received. Certainly, the feedback in my electorate of Forde is exactly that. It has allowed people who might otherwise have had to make different decisions receive funds out of their superannuation accounts. I note the comments from those opposite in their contributions that it has left some people with zero balances in their accounts. I acknowledge that, but I think that in the context of the past 12 or 18 months the ability of people to access their super to get them through some very difficult circumstances has been critically important. That's actually not an unusual provision for superannuation, because there are hardship provisions within our superannuation system that allow people in certain circumstances to access a portion of their superannuation to get them through those circumstances. This bill, as part of the suite of bills that this government has rolled out in relation to superannuation over the past few years, is another piece of the puzzle of ensuring that regulation around super ensures that members of superannuation funds have the opportunity to see the maximum amount of super accumulated during their working life to ensure that, in combination with the age pension, if necessary, they will have the lifestyle in retirement that they wish to achieve. If people are to have a level of financial security without the financial stress and pressure of wondering how they are going to pay for day-to-day living expenses—maybe when they retire they want to buy a new car, upgrade some of their furniture, go on a nice holiday and all those sorts of things—it's critically important that we have a superannuation system, in conjunction with our age pension system where necessary, that gives people the hope and confidence that in their retirement they'll be able to enjoy their retirement and live a lifestyle that they wish to live. I commend this bill and everything else that this government is doing in the superannuation space to the House. 18:53 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra Labor is the party of superannuation. We invented it, and today Australians have $3 trillion in nest eggs for retirement, $3 trillion of economic security for Australians to enjoy after decades of hard work, $3 trillion of investment in the economy, $3 trillion of planning for the future by the Australian Labor Party and $3 trillion defended by the Australian Labor Party. This defence continues in the face of absurd ideology by members of the Morrison government. Why doesn't the Morrison government want to help Australians set themselves up for retirement? Australia has the third-largest pool of retirement savings in the world. As a share of GDP, our private retirement savings outrank the US, the UK and Canada. Why doesn't the Morrison government celebrate these facts? This bill implements the government's 2021 budget measure Your Future, Your Super. The government claims these measures will enhance the performance of superannuation funds and reduce the number of duplicate accounts in the system. It also implements the government's commitment to action on one of the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry, which recommended that a mechanism be developed to staple members to a single superannuation account. Fundamentally, these aims are commendable and should be pursued. Many Australians lose money due to multiple super accounts established in their name. The government can and should do more to respond to this issue. But, of course, the devil is in the detail, as it so often is with this government, and I'll speak more about that later. Likewise, improving the performance of super funds should be pursued. No system is perfect, and we should always be looking for ways to make such an important system more productive for Australians who rely on the system to retire well. We know from the Productivity Commission that underperforming funds are costing Australians $3 billion a year. We must fix this. We must ensure Australians are getting the most out of any investment they make in super. But this bill does not do that. Labor supports the implementation of an objective performance benchmark for superannuation funds, but Labor cannot support this bill being put forward today. As drafted, this bill will damage the superannuation accounts of Australians. It is not in the interests of Australians with a super balance. As usual, Labor has had to put forward amendments to make this bill better. We want to fix this bill. We want to ensure an improved version of this bill succeeds and assists all Australians with superannuation. We want an objective performance test and we want to close down issues with multiple accounts, but we cannot support a bill that staples members to underperforming funds. Treasury has estimated that 21 out of 77 default MySuper funds, covering three million Australians, will fail the benchmark on day one. This means that, if this bill passes, up to three million people will be stapled to a dud fund for life. This is typical of the Morrison government: heralding something as a fix and an improvement but leaving behind millions of Australians—three million Australians, in this case. The information I just referred to is Treasury's own information—the government's Treasury. But the government have ignored that relevant piece of information in the creation of this bill. And, for the party of liberalism and for the free market, it is very strange that the Morrison government has included in this bill the power for the Treasurer to cancel any investment made by a super fund. Labor cannot support a bill that enables the Treasurer to cancel the investment decisions of a super fund. This destructive move by the government is astounding. The government is frivolously playing with the retirement savings of Australians and also putting at risk the ability of super funds to make prudent investment decisions in the interests of their members. As the member for Grayndler said earlier, this is what you see under totalitarian regimes, not here in Australia. A clause contained in schedule 3 of the bill gives the Treasurer the power to make a regulation to declare any particular payment or investment made by superannuation fund as not being in the 'best financial interests' of members. This power is not subject to any sort of test and could be used to ban payments that are in the best financial interests of members. This power could be used by any future Treasurer to prevent any particular investment they oppose, and this power has been opposed by Australia's business community, including the Australian Institute of Company Directors. This power will also introduce a sovereign risk element into Australian investment decisions. Investors may be reluctant to invest in Australian assets alongside superannuation funds, with the knowledge that commitments made by superannuation funds could be cancelled at the behest of the Treasurer. Australian superannuation schemes are seen as safe bets by investors around the globe. By taking this power, the Morrison government is putting this at risk. Global investors will look to make investments elsewhere if they know the Treasurer can cancel the investments. It continues to astound me that the Morrison government hold themselves up a strong economic managers. In fact, they are strong economic meddlers, and this is exactly what they want to do with your super—with the super of all Australian retirees and Australian workers. They are not on your side. The Morrison government want you to lose the vaccine race and now they want to lose the super balance race too. It is astounding and disgraceful. There are several other problems with this bill. The bill attacks the basis of insurance in superannuation, the industrial default system, meaning that workers in high-risk industries will miss out on insurance tailored to their profession. Non-industrially determined funds often include exclusions in the default insurance packages for high-risk occupations. Our truck drivers, construction workers, police officers, firefighters and health workers deserve better than this move by this regressive government. The government's bill will take effect from 1 July 2021, requiring Australian employers to scramble to implement new systems in less than a month. It's astounding that a government with such a tiny legislative agenda couldn't get its act together to get this through the parliament. The government's bill has huge gaps in coverage. It will only cover default MySuper products, when the vast majority of underperforming funds are concentrated in the choice sector. The bill introduces new administrative burdens on superannuation funds, tying funds up in red tape, which will ultimately be paid for by fund members through increased administration fees. This comes from a government that goes on and on about eradicating red tape but can't help but create red tape in sectors that they have an ideological aversion to. Why does the Morrison government hate super? It should tick all their boxes—it boosts investment in the economy and enables people to prepare for their own retirements so as to decrease their reliance on the government via the pension and other supports. Instead, this government trashes the super system while also refusing to prepare the pension system so it can support people without adequate superannuation in retirement. The government hates these funds because they are associated with unions. To me, it makes sense that unions would have an association with super, as they know what workers need and how to support them. The numbers speak for themselves. Industry super funds consistently have lower fees and better returns, not to mention better insurance options, which actually insure for the risks that specific workforces face in their work. Since 2018, the net value of assets in retail super funds has increased by 3.2 per cent, to $645 billion. Over the same period, industry super funds have grown by 30 per cent, to $814 billion. Furthermore, industry funds don't pay dividends to shareholders. Their shareholders are their members, and the numbers demonstrate the benefits of setting up super like this. Our super system is already contributing more than twice the amount to the retirement of Australians than the pension system is. What would this government do if that were not the case? With an aging population, how is the government preparing for an increased call on the pension system? With this challenge ahead, why are those opposite attacking super? It's because the coalition doesn't like super and has consistently voted against progress in this area. Furthermore, despite having an increase to 12 per cent already legislated, this government refuses to commit to it. It refuses to provide certainty to workers and to business, with continued delays to increases. We know that the current 9.5 per cent is not enough and that Australians will fall short in retirement if that doesn't increase. We also know that businesses need certainty when planning for these increases. Yes, the pandemic has been tough for many businesses, but, as the Treasurer keeps telling us, the recovery is strong. Businesses need to be able to plan with certainty when it comes to how much their wages bill will be. The government's dillydallying on super increases means they cannot do this. I've spoken about super before in this place, but the following is worth repeating. The government will tell you that super increases suppress wage growth. The superannuation minister, Senator Jane Hume, said that last year. But, according to research from Per Capita, freezing super has previously led to a loss of net income for workers. Per Capita has found that, as a result of the freeze on the superannuation guarantee in 2014 by this government, the average worker has lost over $3,400 in super over the intervening five years. At the same time, their take-home pay has declined by over $1,000 in real terms, giving them a net loss of $5,425. Of course, the Morrison government relies on these lies in its rhetoric on super because it wants you to believe that if it doesn't act on super your wages will go up. The Per Capita research demonstrates that this is not true. The government knows this, but those opposite continue with the lies because they hate super. They don't care about your retirement, and they don't care about your wages either. We must continue with legislated increases to super. Each year, for the next five years, super will increase by 0.5 per cent, and we must ensure that this happens. It is a conservative approach to help business, workers and Australia's pension system. Unsurprisingly, the Morrison government has missed several other key improvements that are required, the key issue being women's super balances. We know that women retire with less super. On average, it is 20.5 per cent lower than men. Last time I checked, women don't have 20.5 per cent less costs than men in retirement. Women don't want to do 20.5 per cent less things in retirement, and I'd hazard a guess that by the time they end up buying they have less to spend in their retirement. Whilst that last figure has no basis, it points to the problem at hand: the increased caring responsibilities, including time taken to care for children, mean that women earn less super and have less in retirement. We need to think carefully about how we improve the super balances of Australian women. We need to think about how we can mitigate the effects on super balances when women go on maternity leave, when women take time off to care for their children and when women work part-time in order to balance caring responsibilities. This bill does nothing about this challenge. The government's women's budget did almost nothing about this. The government has said that they will remove the $450 per month threshold under which employers are exempt from paying employees super. Good. They should have done this years ago. But it's not going to help women retire comfortably. For months prior to the budget, the government was briefing out to journalists that they were going to do something about women's super in the budget. And that was all they did—almost nothing. In fact, they wanted to let women trying to free domestic violence raid their own super accounts. What a disgraceful idea that was, that, thankfully, they dropped. In Senate estimates this week it's been shown that that was actually going to be a saving in their budget. That is shameful—absolutely shameful. Moving onto the administrative elements of this bill, Labor supports the implementation of an objective performance benchmark for superannuation funds. However, the design of the mechanism proposed by the government is concerning. The proposed performance benchmark could penalise trustees for investing in Australian unlisted assets, such as infrastructure, venture capital or privately owned business. The proposed mechanism would benchmark these long-term investments against international indexes that do not reflect the performance of Australian assets. The bill also ignores administration fees. The proposed initial design of the measure excludes consideration of administration fees. While the government has indicated that they will fix this, without draft regulations it is impossible to be sure that they will address the issues raised. Administration fees make up the largest proportion of fees paid by superannuation members, and the Productivity Commission identified high administration fees as a key factor causing low returns for superannuation members. Of course, the Morrison government hasn't done the work and have not fixed this, despite the fact that they use admin fees as a key reason why they don't support our superannuation system. The bill only covers MySuper products and choice products defined as being trustee directed products. This definition has been created exclusively for the purposes of this bill and will exclude a large number of choice products from performance measurement. The definition would appear to exclude a large number of superannuation products that have been identified by the Productivity Commission as being likely to have high fees and low returns. Again, this is sloppy work by the Morrison government. When it comes to superannuation, this government is not on your side. This is another thinly veiled attack on the superannuation of Australians—which is their own hard-earned money. Labor will always protect our superannuation system. 19:08 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I have been eagerly anticipating the contributions to this debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Your Future, Your Super) Bill 2021. It's a very, very important bill for Australians—for the super retirements. But, unfortunately for the Labor Party, the member for Canberra, the previous Labor speaker, has let the cat out of the bag about why Labor is opposing this bill. It's because it is a protection racket—a protection racket run by the Labor Party to protect their union mates and protect the dollars that flow into the unions from the superannuation scheme. That is why the Labor Party want to oppose this particular bill. It's because they want to keep the money flowing into union coffers and to keep their union mates in jobs, and to make sure that that money then flows to the Labor Party. Let's be very, very clear about what this bill is about. It's about having a single default fund that follows you around, it's about making sure that people have better transparency about whether their fund is underperforming, and it's about ensuring that your fund is acting in your best financial interests. What possible reason could there be to oppose those three very important safeguards for consumers? As the member for Canberra said, it's because they want to keep unions injected into your super. The member for Canberra tried to make the point that everything's better with unions, the world is better when unions are involved. But in fact, some of the behaviour of unions is what has led to this bill. Time and time again we see that these measures are there to safeguard some of our newest employees, those young employees who are new to the workforce and who aren't as focused on their retirement as people who are further along in their career, and understandably so. We get it. There are a lot of competing priorities. You want to start your career, you want to establish your career, you want to start a family. These are more pressing priorities than your superannuation. Unfortunately, because of the way the Labor Party have set up the superannuation scheme, while you're not focusing on your superannuation, the unions are. They're focused on making sure that you have multiple different funds whenever you go to a new job— Mr Connelly 282984 More fees. Mr SIMMONDS 282983 because that means more fees. You're quite right, member for Stirling, that means more fees for the union movement. And guess what? When you're not focused, it means the union funds can continue to underperform. They are relying on their members, probably good paid-up members, focusing on other priorities and not looking at their underperforming union super funds. This bill will simply mean that those union funds have to be transparent, so their members know about whether or not they're underperforming. Whether your funds are underperforming will be brought to the members' attention, so that you can make the best decisions for your retirement. This bill comes back to a fundamental difference between us and the Labor Party, between the Morrison government and the Labor Party members opposite, including the member for Canberra. We know that superannuation is your money. It's your savings, yours to spend and yours to guide as you think best. The Labor Party thinks that it's the Labor Party's money. They think they know how best to spend it, the unions know how best to spend it, the superannuation boards stacked with their union mates and ex-union officials know how best to spend your money, so you best put your money into the super funds, not know whether your fund is underperforming, have your funds diluted by multiple funds through multiple unions because you go from job to job and each union signs you up to a different fund for your different jobs. All this bill does is provide transparency for your funds, for your money, so that you can see it and better guide it, rather than the Labor Party trying to guide it. So I am deeply disappointed, but not surprised, that the Labor Party would choose to oppose this bill because it is what we see from them time and time again. They are on the side of a protection racket for their union mates. Members on this side of the chamber are on the side of Australians and making sure that they have a secure retirement through control and transparency of their retirement funds. It should be a no-brainer that we would all want Australians to have a secure retirement. This side of the chamber wants them to be able to better plan their retirement and enjoy their retirement in the best possible way. That means having more money in your superannuation. To do this, we need a superannuation scheme. We on this side of the chamber support superannuation very strongly, but we want it to be efficient. We want it to work for Australians. We want it to work for those who are investing their money in it, not work for the vested interests that are set up by the Labor Party. We know that the Labor Party think that the retirement savings of Australians is their cash cow. This is their opportunity to spend it how they want. We saw that at the last election when they were so eager to put the retiree tax on Australians, when they were so eager to put $387 billion worth of taxes on all Australians. The Labor Party think that they know how to spend your money better than you do. We don't. The facts of what is contained in this bill will provide some very important safeguards and transparency measures for all Australians. When superannuation accounts are automatically opened when employees start a new job or they change jobs—as they often do when they start and they're building their careers and not thinking as eagerly about their retirement savings and growing their retirement savings as people at the end of their careers are—they're holding several accounts. Along with those several accounts, they're getting several sets of premiums and several sets of fees. This bill will stop that. This bill will ensure that your fund travels with you from job to job. Mr Connelly 282984 That's ideal. Mr SIMMONDS 282983 It is ideal, member for Stirling. I take the interjection. It is ideal, because it will allow Australians to better grow their money for retirement even when they are not as engaged with the superannuation system early on in their career. It will be more efficient— Ms Wells interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! The member for Ryan will be heard in silence. Mr SIMMONDS 282983 and there will be less fees— Mr Falinski G86 'Fewer' fees! Mr SIMMONDS 282983 on superannuation funds in retirement. I don't understand how the Labor Party can stand there with a straight face by opposing this bill, essentially saying: 'We're happy for extra fees on the superannuation accounts of Australians. We're happy for the superannuation accounts, particularly of young Australians, to be eroded often down to nothing by fees.' I also want to talk about the best financial interests duty. This seems to be the one that Labor, the Greens and some of the greener than green independents are hung up on. We know that— Ms Wells interjecting— Mr Falinski interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! The member for Mackellar and the member for Lilley can step outside and have a conversation. The member for Ryan will be heard in silence. Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Thank you very much, Mr Deputy Speaker. I appreciate your protection from the member from Mackellar, who is doing the most interrupting of this particular speech! I'll start again. I was talking about the best financial interests duty, because this seems to be the part of the bill that Labor, the Greens and the even greener independents are hung up on. This is a general principle that there should be very little argument about. Superannuation funds should work in the best financial interests of their members, of the fundholders. It's their money, after all. We keep coming back to this fundamental principle: we know that it's their money. It's the money of Australians; it's not the money of the superannuation funds and the ex-union members which many industry super funds have stacked on their boards. It's not their money to play with. The bill will strengthen enforcement of this obligation by reversing the evidential burden of proof, by creating a regulation-making power to prohibit certain types of payments or investments, by creating a regulation-making power to provide for additional obligations on trustees when making an investment which could be used to avoid their obligation to act in the best financial interests of their members and by making breaches of record-keeping obligations a strict liability offence. When you break it down, which of those could the Labor Party possibly have a problem with? I also want to talk about the important measures contained in this bill to ensure that Australians have better transparency about whether or not their fund is underperforming. Schedule 2 to the bill will ensure members' retirement savings are protected from underperforming funds by subjecting superannuation products to a new annual performance test. Members who hold a product that fails the test will be notified. This is where it comes back to proactivity: members will be contacted when their product fails the test—that is, that it's underperforming. Products that fail the test for two consecutive years will be closed to new members, protecting members from entering persistently underperforming products. This will end the gravy train, particularly of underperforming funds who continue to underperform. The reason funds can get away with underperforming is that they are essentially preying on the disinterest of their members. They are preying on their members by continually underperforming and by relying on the hands-off approach, the set-and-forget approach, that many of us apply to superannuation. The introduction of the annual performance test is expected to deliver some $10.7 billion in benefits for members over 10 years. As members, they'll be notified. They'll see that their fund is underperforming over multiple years and they'll be leaving those products. They'll be going to funds that are performing well and they'll be getting higher returns, more money, into their superannuation as a result. Schedule 2 to the bill will also empower members to make decisions about who manages their savings by requiring the ATO to publish MySuper product ratings on the government's new interactive YourSuper comparison tool. The tool is expected to boost retirement savings by $3.3 billion over 10 years, again, by empowering more members to engage with their superannuation. This side of the chamber supports superannuation, but we want members to be engaged in it. We want members to have the transparency to better look after their own retirement savings and to have a better plan for their own retirement savings. We would have hoped that there would have been a bipartisan approach to protecting older Australians—protecting all Australians—in terms of making sure that they can retire in a fashion which will enable them to keep up their lifestyle. Unfortunately, it's only this side of the chamber that is pursuing this with gusto. We will do so despite all of the objections of the Labor members opposite, who continue to play politics with the retirement funds of Australians. It may make for good theatre in this chamber for the Labor Party, but all it does is hurt hardworking Australians who are simply trying to fund their retirement, save for their retirement, and are trusting superannuation funds to look after their best interests. For most of the funds, who are looking after their best interests, these obligations will all be very straightforward. For those that are underperforming, that are preying on their members who are less active and less engaged, this will stop that. It will protect Australians. Under this bill, your savings, your money, your super and your retirement will be more secure and will be better off. The Labor Party want to stop that. This government will deliver it. 19:22 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley What a relief to have that over with! Honestly, I feel like I just heard a 30-second jingle over and over for 15 minutes. I think the member for Ryan has had a passionate commitment to this bill for about 17 minutes, 15 of which he spent on his feet. An honourable member interjecting— Ms WELLS 264121 Yes, he wasn't even on the speakers list. He speaks of his deep and passionate commitment to the outcomes of superannuation for ordinary Australians, and yet he doesn't appear on the speakers list. Deidre Chambers—what a coincidence! And, yet, for all his passion and commitment to the area, he's vacating the field. See you later! Mr Falinski interjecting— Ms WELLS 264121 They've got a lot of things on, the shadow ministry, not like humble backbenchers. Mr Falinski interjecting— Ms WELLS 264121 I look forward to the member for Mackellar's ongoing contributions to my speech. I'm happy for him to continue to contribute. I welcome all members of their squad and their ongoing contribution to Australian public policy. Mr Falinski interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! The member for Lilley has the call and will be heard in silence. Ms WELLS 264121 Thank you, Deputy Speaker Vasta. It's such a privilege to serve alongside you in Brisbane, I must say. Australia's retirement income system is world class. We are ranked third on the Mercer global pension index behind the Netherlands and Denmark. Our success is credited to our three-pillar system made of up of the age pension, voluntary savings and our universal compulsory superannuation system. For most Australians, our superannuation system is the difference between retiring in poverty and retiring comfortably with dignity. It is the difference between being able to afford medication and not being able to. It is the difference between being able to use the heater in your own house in winter and having to rug up in blankets and coats. The policy decisions that we make today will have a far-reaching impact on what retirement looks like for all hardworking Australians, because a strong superannuation system also means a strong economy. It draws strength from years of stable policy settings that allow trustees to invest in the long term. As we navigate the worse economic recession Australia has seen in a century, our superannuation system can be used as a tool to create financial stability in the market and provide some of the infrastructure investment we desperately need to create jobs. Just look at the benefits superannuation investment has provided in and around my electorate of Lilley, and, may I note, your electorate of Bonner, Deputy Speaker. Brisbane Airport and the Port of Brisbane are both major infrastructure assets of AustralianSuper. Today the Port of Brisbane supports 4,000 local jobs, and the Brisbane Airport, in my electorate of Lilley, supports nearly 24,000 jobs, including 6,600 aviation jobs specifically. That is, together, 30,000 local jobs which have benefited from the infrastructure investment from superannuation funds. It is nation-building infrastructure, like the Brisbane Airport, like the Port of Brisbane, that this bill hinders. This bill not only creates instability by weakening the sector; it undermines the system's ability to contribute to our economic recovery. Superannuation is a proud Labor legacy, and we want to make sure that the system is performing in the interests of its members. There is definite room for improvement in our superannuation system. No-one contests that. Gender parity in retirement savings is a significant problem which threatens the economic security of Australian women and sees too many Australian women retire in poverty. The average Queensland woman has almost $55,000 less in superannuation than her male counterpart at retirement. Women over the age of 55 are becoming the fastest-growing cohort of homeless Australians. There are a few contributing factors to this which the federal government could be addressing. Women are still paid less than men, and in turn that is reflected in their super contributions. Women are also more likely to be employed in casual work and have multiple jobs. This was a barrier until recently, because they had to earn over $450 a week at each job to be entitled to super from each employer, instead of having their overall income for the week considered. Women, on average, spend 12 years less in the full-time workforce than men do, which has a dramatic impact on their super balance. Paying superannuation during paid parental leave could help bridge this gap. The reality is: this bill, as written, will not implement any of these policy initiatives and it will not deliver better outcomes for Australian superannuation members. In fact, the evidence provided to the Senate inquiry into this bill makes it clear that the government's proposed approach to superannuation will do the exact opposite. This bill will damage retirement outcomes for ordinary Australians and subject our superannuation system, the pride of our country, to considerable risk. Members before me have highlighted a number of flaws in the design of the stapling mechanism drafted to this bill. Employers will only have two months leeway before they're required to comply with the proposed stapling mechanism. There is no mechanism to ensure that the fund a member is stapled to is a high-performing fund. Workers in high-risk industries may miss out on insurance provisions tailored to their industry, meaning they may not qualify for payments in the event of death or total and permanent disability, a consequence which is extremely concerning to me as a former workers compensation lawyer who saw people injured in a way where they would benefit from those payments every single day. But there are two key features of this bill that we would like to focus on with our remaining time: the performance mechanism and the best financial interests test. Before that, let me address how this affects us within the current COVID-19 crisis. The COVID-19 crisis presents an opportunity for vision and nation-changing reform that would allow ordinary Australian workers to share in the benefits of success which have recently been handed to the private sector. Week after week, Northside families are struggling to get ahead amid unrelenting underemployment, high unemployment and weak wage growth. Housing affordability is becoming more and more out of reach for ordinary workers, and all the government can offer is policy patchwork and piecemeal interventions that will just end up inflating property prices. We have almost 50 per cent less apprentices in my electorate of Lilley than when the LNP came to power eight long years ago. That is 1,823 high-skilled jobs on the Northside of Brisbane gone. And we still don't have a real, tangible plan to help elderly Australians who are being neglected in our broken private aged-care system. Instead of focusing on the systemic issues that impact the lives of our constituents every single day, the Morrison government is like a dog chasing its tail, continuing its obsessive ideological attacks on super. We should be in this place focusing our energy and working together to rewrite the rules for the betterment of the people that we represent. We should be making sure that any future economic growth that follows the pandemic is both inclusive and sustainable. It is time the Morrison government steered the market towards fairer outcomes for all, not just for shareholders and for their corporate interests. Workers in high-risk industries may miss out on insurance provisions tailored to their industry, meaning they may not qualify for payments in the event of death or total permanent disability. Section 117A of this bill delegates significant power to the Treasurer to personally override an investment decision or payment decision made by a superannuation trustee. This power is not subject to any sort of test or oversight. Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 99 ADJOURNMENT COVID-19: Diaspora Communities in Australia, COVID-19: Vaccination 99 19:30 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell [by video link] Last Wednesday, I attended the Australia-Nepal Friendship Society charity gala dinner at the Canberra clubhouse, organised in association with the Australasian Nepalese Medical and Dental Association. The gala dinner, under the banner of 'Let's get united for Nepal to fight against COVID-19', was organised to raise funds to purchase oxygen concentrators, to be made available to remote Nepalese communities. I was there at the invitation of the President of the ANMDA, Dr Chandra Pokharel, a Melbourne based GP, a good friend and active member of the Melbourne Nepalese community, of which a large number live in my electorate of Calwell. A significant amount of money was raised on the evening. But what interests me most is the dedication that our local Nepalese community in Australia have to their compatriots back home. Through their own initiative, they have taken it upon themselves to assist in identifying areas of need in Nepal, which is overwhelmed by COVID-19 and is in desperate need of oxygen, as well as access to PPE and, of course, vaccines. As a network of Nepalese-Australian medical and health professionals, the ANMDA has found direct ways of assisting the overworked and under-pressure nurses in Nepal by setting up an online buddy system. Our diaspora communities especially are feeling added anxiety, with concerns about family and friends in their home countries. I know firsthand the anguish that my local Indian-Australian community has been going through, with so many Australian citizens unable to get home to Australia from India. This anguish is also shared by our local Sri Lankan community, who, along with the Nepalese community, have approached me seeking advice on whether Australia can consider exporting our locally-made AstraZeneca vaccine to Nepal and Sri Lanka. Both Sri Lanka and Nepal were relying on AstraZeneca vaccines to be made available to them from India, but the critical situation there means that India won't be exporting at this time. This brings me to the current lockdown in Victoria. I can't find words to express the devastation we all feel—the devastation and collective anxiety that my local community feels. We enjoyed a period of relative freedom and ease, where we felt lucky to be living in Australia as the rest of the world continued to succumb to the devastating effects of this pandemic. Perhaps a false sense of security set in. But now, in Victoria, we see how quickly COVID can rear its ugly head. Since the last long and debilitating lockdown in Victoria, we've introduced two vaccines in this country—AstraZeneca and Pfizer. AstraZeneca is manufactured here in Australia at CSL in Broadmeadows in my electorate. However, I'm concerned about the hesitation in the community regarding COVID vaccines, especially the AstraZeneca vaccine. Unfortunately, the government has allowed this public hesitation and complacency to develop, through its less-than-robust public campaign, mixed signals and lack of clarity on what is available when and where. And this has created confusion. The inadequate pace of the vaccine rollout to even the most vulnerable—those in aged-care facilities—leaves a lot to be desired. The Commonwealth's mixed signals, their failure to enact built-for-purpose quarantine centres and the absence of a clear road map out of this pandemic have left Australians exposed. The Victorian example shows how each day lost to delivering on Australia's vaccination program can turn into the potential for weeks of devastating lockdowns and restrictions in our bigger cities. We cannot ride out this pandemic on a wing and a prayer. While mass vaccinations are taking place systematically in the UK, Europe, the US and elsewhere, we are floundering. As comparable countries begin to move to travel and to open up, our borders remain shut. We need to begin preparing Australia to open up, and vaccinations are a key to this. My appeal to the public is this: get protected—get vaccinated. There are people around the world who are desperate for access to vaccines, and we shouldn't squander our good fortune here in this country. To my local health service, DPV Health and CEO Don Tidbury and his staff: I want especially to thank you for the work you are doing and the work you have done in setting up our vaccination hub in Broadmeadows. You're currently operating three very busy vaccination hubs and two large testing sites seven days a week. It is these local community engagement programs and the work of our healthcare workers on the front line which helped us through the pandemic last year and which will help us see it out this year. I wish to thank them all and give them my ongoing support and gratitude on behalf of my electorate and, of course, on behalf of the parliament. Herbert Electorate: Australian Labor Party 100 19:35 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert I rise in the House tonight on a matter of great importance. I've spent some time contemplating whether or not to make the statement I'm about to make. I have a firm belief that people should always come before politics and that it's vital to play the ball and not the person. I also have a firm belief that it's important to do the right thing and stand for what is right. It's in that vein that I stand before the House tonight. Over the past six years, the people of Townsville have been devastated by a crime crisis that has seen our city draw comparisons to Johannesburg in South Africa. Devastating new statistics show that in the month of May alone there were 483 break-ins, 342 thefts, 140 assaults and 131 car thefts. You can guarantee that almost every single one of those crimes was against a hardworking, decent, law-abiding North Queenslander who deserved better and has now had their life turned upside down through absolutely no fault of their own. A petition launched by the Queensland opposition leader calling for urgent criminal legislation reform drew more than 15,000 signatures in a matter of days. North Queenslanders are gutted and have also had a gutful of living petrified, in fear of what's coming next. I stand in the House tonight to call on the Queensland Labor Party to pick up its act and clean out the rot that starts at the very top of the Labor Party tree. The elephant in the room here is that Townsville would have to be the only place in the nation that holds the unenviable title of having a sitting mayor who is facing a death charge in courts, a state MP banned from a safe night precinct for late-night drunken brawling and a local Labor campaign strategist with a history of unlawful drug possession. While the Labor Party would prefer we gloss over these facts and pretend it's all fairytales and rainbows, we have three people in positions of extreme power who are making a complete mockery of our city, the people who live in it and the trauma they face on a daily basis. Recently I spoke to the family of Darryl Lynch, the man who died after being hit some 16 months ago by a vehicle Mayor Jenny Hill was driving. While it's important to note in this House that I make no judgement on the circumstances surrounding the accident and that I extend my sympathies to all involved, it has been truly horrific for Mr Lynch's family to have to see the person who was behind the wheel in that accident remain so visible in our community and appear on their television screens almost daily, including just days ago when Mayor Hill posed in the Townsville Bulletin beside a V8. To say that was in poor taste is a gross understatement. In the interest of basic decency and out of respect for the esteem in which the position of mayor should be held, I would ask that the mayor reconsider her position and stand down until after her matter has been finalised and due process has occurred through the court. I also call on the Queensland Premier to start leading by example on crime and discipline the member for Mundingburra for his role in the drunken brawl that saw him fined and banned from Townsville's safe night precinct. It's no wonder young criminals in our community are laughing at the system when the lawmakers in the state hold no regard for the law and receive no repercussions for their unlawful actions. I'd also like to ask the Premier why Labor campaign strategist Dolan Hayes remains in the Labor love-in circle, despite pleading guilty to possessing dangerous drugs. This is a man who, aside from being a key adviser to campaigns including those of Mayor Hill and Townsville MP Scott Stewart, is on the public record as having open access to Queensland government ministers. For a Premier who likes to talk a lot about integrity, we're certainly not seeing that in her actions. It says a lot about why our community is in the state it's in when three people named by the Townsville Bulletin as being among the most influential people in the city have faced or are facing serious court and public nuisance matters. I call on the Queensland Labor Party to clean up its act, lead by example and bring some integrity back to the positions from which our city desperately needs to see some leadership. COVID-19: Vaccination, Queensland Day, State of Origin 101 19:40 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley Roughly, 3,549 healthcare workers are employed at the Prince Charles Hospital—and if I could personally thank each and every one of them for their work over the past 18 months I would do that. Being a healthcare worker is no easy job at the very best of times. Not only do their patients rely on them for medical care but they also often rely on them for emotional support as well. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the Prince Charles Hospital nurses, doctors, administrative staff, cleaners, wardies, orderlies and kitchen staff risked their own health and safety to look after the health and safety of others. Despite all the dud kicks that they have been given from the federal government around the vaccine rollout, our healthcare workers have been working tirelessly to ensure that Queensland's most at risk workers and vulnerable are getting vaccinated. The Prince Charles Hospital staff have administered more than 5,000 doses to date. That number will grow as the Palaszczuk government steps into the void left by the federal government's incompetence and takes up the task of vaccinating our aged-care workforce. There are more than 460 aged-care facilities across Queensland, and we really do have very little visibility as to how many of those facilities are still waiting for their first dose. Nationally, we know that only 8.7 per cent of aged-care workers have been fully vaccinated. But, thanks to the leadership of Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk and health minister Yvette Maree D'Ath, any aged-care worker, no matter their age, will be able to book a vaccine appointment at any one of the vaccine sites that we currently have in operation across the state. I would like to take this opportunity to encourage all northsiders to get the vaccine if you can and when you get the chance. I have had my first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine as a person with a pre-existing health condition. I had it at the Nundah Village Family Practice on Sandgate Road—and, other than a bit of a sore arm, I am doing great. I'll be heading back to get my second dose when it's time. Our Northside community has rallied together to beat COVID-19. We stayed inside when we were asked, we wore masks, we washed our hands and we stayed 1.5 metres apart. If we did all of that then a little jab now is really not that much to ask. Even if you are not eligible for the vaccine right now, you can still register on the Queensland Health website and you will be notified when a local appointment becomes available for you. This Sunday, 6 June, marks the biggest day in the calendar year. It is Queensland Day. Friends, it is Queensland Day. It is a celebration of Queensland's birthday and marks the state's official, just, meritorious and worthy separation from New South Wales as an independent colony on 6 June 1859. Celebrating the great state of Queensland, the magnificent Tropical North nation, is the perfect way to kick off Origin week, where I am advised by the best in the business that the mighty Maroons look set to absolutely demolish New South Wales at Townsville Stadium on Wednesday night. Mr Speaker, I am sure that, as a Victorian, you will, by default, join with me in cheering on Queensland against New South Wales. We wish the team the very best—against some significant injuries. We wish them all the resilience, all the strength, all the fortitude and all the endurance that the greatest nation in the world, Queensland, possesses. We wish them all the very best on Wednesday night. South Australia: Energy 101 19:43 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I'd like to take this opportunity to welcome an exciting decision this week, which was the Australian Energy Regulator's decision to approve the RIT-T, the regulated investment test transmission, for the South Australia-New South Wales Interconnector. This is a project that's been in the pipeline for quite a few years now. In essence this, the final hurdle, is the regulator approving the two investment partners, ElectraNet and TransGrid, on the numbers that they've submitted, to proceed to undertake that project—because they obviously get a guaranteed return on the capital that they invest and, of course, pass on the relevant cost of that into the transmission grid—and see the grids of South Australia and New South Wales plugged together. This is not only a milestone in energy security for my home state of South Australia but also an opportunity for enormous generation investment in South Australia. We're currently interconnected to the national grid through Victoria, the Hayward line, which is an 800 megawatt line. There is a small link through the Riverland, the Murray link, but that is under 200 megawatts. This is a 750 megawatt connection into New South Wales, so we're effectively doubling the amount of electricity that can come into South Australia but also that can go out of South Australia at any point in time to nearly 1,500 megawatts. That, at times, is less than the total consumption in the grid of South Australia, so it certainly will change the dynamic that led to the blackout in South Australia in September 2016 when the Hayward line went down and the South Australian grid had to shut down. But, on a more positive note, it means of course that South Australia can double our potential energy export into the rest of the National Energy Market. We have enormous generation potential in South Australia, particularly across renewables. What's holding us back is that the total amount that we can export out of our grid on top of what we're consuming in our grid is obviously a fixed amount. This increases that by 750 megawatts, so there'll now be so many investment decisions that can be made on the basis of the amount of electricity generated in South Australia which can, of course, go to so many more markets—750 megawatts worth of electrons in fact, once this piece of infrastructure is installed. It also means that we can balance the intermittency of the generation blend in South Australia at the moment and have more reliability in our grid. Of course, one of the significant issues that led to the blackout in South Australia in 2016 was that intermittency. The fact that we lost the Hayward line, we had a dramatic drop in generation due to weather events and the frequency in the system fell very suddenly, the whole system shut down and took four hours to switch back on. So, with another 750 megawatt interconnector to a different energy market, being New South Wales, that of course means that scenario can't possibly ever happen again. But, as I say, more importantly, it also means that a whole range of investment decisions will change in their dynamic because of the increased export opportunity. That'll be great for South Australian energy consumers as well, because, if the financial palatability of some of these projects is much more significant now, thanks to this interconnector, then the domestic market always benefits before the export market. It means that when we have new projects coming online in important renewable sectors, like grid-scale solar and of course more windfarms and other potential projects as new technologies become more commercialised into the future, that will benefit the South Australian energy consumer first but it will also benefit our economy, because we can definitely be, in South Australia, an exporter of generated electricity into the grid. I know there are so many people, particularly significant businesses, waiting to see this milestone reached, to have the confidence that the interconnector will be going ahead, so that they can commensurably make their decisions on their investments for more generation in South Australia. It's very exciting from the jobs point of view, it's very exciting from an electricity consumer's point of view in South Australia and it's very exciting from an energy security point of view in South Australia. This is a great decision. We've been waiting a long, long time for it. It gives great confidence now that this project will go ahead, and the South Australian economy and South Australian consumers will be all the better for it. Cybersecurity 102 19:48 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand This week ransomware became a literal barbeque stopper when JBS Foods, Australia's largest meat processor, was paralysed by a ransomware attack mounted by Russian cybercriminals. All beef and lamb kills along the east coast of Australia were cancelled. It might not be immediately obvious, but the meat business is heavily reliant on IT systems for record keeping, regulatory documentation, shipping, labelling and inventory, and doing these things without IT networks is crippling. JBS has access to backup systems and is doing its best to get back up online quickly, but these attacks frequently cause outages of multiple weeks. The White House is assessing the potential of this attack to cause meat shortages in the country. That's bad news for barbeques around the country but even worse news for the 11,000 people JBS employs in Australia and the thousands that have been stood down indefinitely as a result of this attack. It's a timely reminder of the economic cost of the scourge of ransomware—it's a jobs and investment destroyer when the economy can least afford it. It has also highlighted the urgent need for the Morrison government to adopt a national ransomware strategy to combat these attacks. This year, 2021, has seen an onslaught of ransomware attacks targeting Australian organisations, which are increasing in scale, including the targeting of the Nine Network and eight hospitals. Since February, Labor has been calling for a comprehensive national ransomware strategy that coordinates government action to reduce the volume of these attacks on Australia, but all the Morrison government does is continue to blame the victims. Fighting ransomware certainly begins with organisational IT security, but it doesn't end there. As we've seen in the recent international Ransomware Task Force report, a proactive government utilising the levers available to it across policy and regulation, law enforcement, diplomacy and its intelligence capabilities could pursue a strategy to reduce the volume of these ransomware attacks on Australian targets. Labor has been calling for such a national ransomware strategy for months now, and we've set out the kinds of things this strategy could include. But, despite the ongoing, serious attacks and incidents, such as on JBS, the Morrison government continues to refuse to act. The JBS Foods barbeque stopper should be a wake-up call for the Morrison government to finally take responsibility. As part of such a national ransomware strategy, the Morrison government needs to get serious about using its signals capabilities to disrupt cybercriminals and deter attacks on Australian targets. To date, these ransomware crews have been able to target Australian organisations with impunity. No wonder we've seen these attacks increasing in their scale and frequency. The Morrison government talks tough on cybersecurity, and I note that the new home affairs minister has listed it as a priority for her new portfolio, but what does it actually do? The head of the Australian Signals Directorate said: Our offensive cyber campaign has only just begun and we will continue to strike back at these cyber criminals operating offshore as they attempt to steal money and data from Australians. But we heard in Senate estimates earlier this afternoon that, in response to the Nine attack, the Australian Signals Directorate took no offensive operations against those that we know are responsible for the attack. Similarly, it's taken no offensive cyberoperations against any of the crews responsible for the ransomware attacks on Australian hospitals. In general, the position of the Morrison government is not to tell us or the cybercriminals targeting Australia what they are doing to disrupt them. A secret deterrent is no deterrent at all. As the former head of the UK National Cyber Security Centre's Ciaran Martin has said, unless statements that we will impose costs on adversaries and take offensive operations against these actors are followed by specific, tangible actions, they risk becoming 'a catchy, useful political slogan devoid of meaning, substance and, consequently, impact'. The Morrison government needs to heed the call of Ciaran Martin. The scourge of ransomware has become an intolerable burden on our nation—a $1 billion annual burden, collectively. It's time that we said enough is enough. It's time to release the hounds on these ransomware crews. As recommended in the international Ransomware Task Force report, the Australian Signals Directorate should develop a target list of the top 10 ransomware groups targeting Australian organisations and then set about disrupting their command and control infrastructure, their communications platforms and their finances. Ransomware groups should fear the consequences of being added to ASD's targeting list. We need to end the age of impunity for ransomware attacks and teach these ransomware groups that there are consequences for targeting Australian organisations with ransomware attacks and that these attacks are not worth the potential benefits. The Morrison government has left Australian governments, businesses and community groups to combat these international ransomware groups for too long. It's time it took responsibility, did its job and developed a national ransomware strategy. These groups are the modern-day pirates, and it's time we treated them that way. Budget 103 19:53 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde A couple of weeks ago, in the week post the budget, I had the pleasure and the privilege of travelling around the electorate of Forde, hosting my annual budget roadshow. One of the questions that people asked, as it wasn't given a lot of airing on the night, was what was in the budget for retirees. I'm happy to note there was a lot in the budget for retirees. We repealed the work test for non-concessional and salary-sacrificed superannuation contributions, allowing Australians who are 67 to 74 more flexibility to contribute to their superannuation leading up to their retirement. These reforms will also reduce complexity in the planning for retirement. The minimum age of the downsizer superannuation contribution will be lowered from 65 to 60. This will allow Australians nearing retirement to make post-tax contributions of up to $300,000 per person when they sell their family home. We've increased the flexibility of the pension loan scheme. Participants will be able to access lump-sum advances of up to a total value of 50 per cent of the maximum annual rate of age pension. A single person will be able to receive lump-sum payments of up to $12,385 per year, while couples combined will receive up to $18,670 per year. We're introducing a no-negative-equity guarantee, which means participants won't have to pay more than the market value of their property as a repayment for their pension loan scheme debt. For many retirees, the significant losses in the financial markets as a result of COVID-19 are having a significant effect on the account balances of their superannuation, pensions and annuities. To assist retirees, the government has reduced the minimum annual payment requirement for account based pensions and annuities, allocated pensions and annuities and market linked pensions and annuities by 50 per cent, which we originally did in the 2019-20 budget. We've extended that to the 2020-21 budget as well. These things are critically important because one of the concerns for many retirees is the risk of outliving their capital. This budget has also committed a record $7.8 billion to reform the residential care sectors to support a better and a more sustainable system. It means that from 1 October 2022 the 21,055 senior Australians living in Ford will have better access and safer care through a new funding model, the Australian National Aged Care Classification system. This will better align funding for patients' care needs and allow providers to focus on delivering quality and safe care. From 1 July 2022 residents and their families will have access to better information, with providers required to report care staffing minutes. I'd also like to take this opportunity to talk about Care360, who do a terrific job in providing an independent assessment system and search functionality for families who are looking to place their parents or their relatives in aged care that is not funded in any way by care providers. They provide a whole range of information that makes the process of looking for suitable aged-care accommodation for their family members that much easier and that much clearer. We've committed more money to health care, which will benefit retirees. We've provided over $220 million to update and add new health services to the Medicare Benefits Schedule. Services such as the new inflammatory tests for bowel cancer will now be Medicare rebated. We've provided $878.7 million to support access to affordable medicines through the PBS. This is in addition to the very significant investment we've already made in the PBS, in the medicines that we've added to it, over our nearly eight years in government. Between 10 per cent and 15 per cent of older people experience depression and they would be more likely to experience contributing factors such as physical illness and personal loss. We are providing support to these people to ensure they have the support to meet their mental health needs. Importantly, we're providing additional support in the Commonwealth Home Support Program. One of the things that I think a lot of people don't appreciate that is available is the Commonwealth seniors health card. It is this government that is providing the support needed to older Australians in their retirement. House adjourned at 20:00 NOTICES 104 NOTICES

Wednesday, 2 June 2021

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Vasta) took the chair at 10:01.

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 105 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Volunteering 105 10:01 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh Today I wish to acknowledge the many volunteers in my electorate of Hindmarsh, in the western suburbs of Adelaide. As members know, National Volunteer Week is held in May of each year, and on the 17th of last month I hosted a ceremony to acknowledge and present awards within my electorate as I've done every year for many years. I was privileged to hand out awards to over 40 recipients, who were all nominated by their peers from the community. Of course, the noun 'volunteer' is freely used in our society. One can volunteer for military service, for a redundancy from employment and for so many other, diverse things. However, these volunteers are those who give of themselves in an altruistic way without being asked and definitely without remuneration. It might be a sporting club, a church group, an RSL, a childcare centre or so many other settings. From my discussions with these wonderful Australians I learned just how important volunteering is to them. Many have said that it brings meaning and purpose to their life while also increasing their self-esteem, their wellbeing and their health. Some said it's also relieved their stress and helped alleviate symptoms of depression and isolation. I was also told that, in addition to having a positive impact on their community, volunteering improves personal relationships. The economic benefit to society form volunteering is also often overlooked. Research from Flinders University back in 2012 and reconfirmed in follow-up studies in 2014 put the value of volunteering to the economy above that of the mining industry. These volunteers make our communities better places for all of s. The year 2020 and the year 2021 have seen unique challenges for society as we know it, brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 restrictions hit the volunteer sector particularly hard. Research demonstrated that two out of three volunteers had to cease their volunteering between February and April last year because of restrictions. I know that in some organisations, like Meals on Wheels, the percentage was even higher. ABS data from 2019 uncovered a 20 per cent decrease in the number of hours volunteered in the community since 2014, even before the pandemic. That's why Volunteering Australia believes we have a need for a reinvigorating volunteering action plan. The peak body is also calling for a whole-of-government national volunteering strategy to address this decline and to ensure key government funded services are sustainable. 2021 must be the year in which volunteering is better understood and acknowledged for its leading role in building and maintaining a stronger, more connected Australian community. Once again, I put on record my profound appreciation of the individuals I met with last month. Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 105 10:04 Mr CONNELLY 282984 Stirling I'm pleased that I'm the first coalition speaker today because I have some wonderful news to report to parliament. Yesterday saw the listing of a drug called Oripro. Oripro is to prevent the premature labour of women and, in so doing, prevent premature births. Premature births are those prior to the 37-week mark. We know that these little babies require a lot more specialised care. We know that this places a great deal of stress on the parents in particular. Just this weekend, I had the wonderful opportunity to meet for the first time my newest niece, little six-month-old Victoria, or Vori, as she's called by her parents as a nickname. She's a beautiful little baby to my brother, Steve, and his wife, Katie. She's now six months old and in wonderful health, but she did come prematurely. I know that placed a lot of stress on Steve and Katie, in particular. The listing of Oripro means that parents like Steve and Katie right around the country can now benefit from having that confidence that these instances of premature births will be greatly reduced. Indeed, on budget night, the Treasurer announced $353 million in support of the health and wellbeing of Australian women. A really important part of that package is the listing of Oripro on the PBS. The rate of premature births, I was surprised to learn, is around eight per cent for non-Indigenous women and around 16 per cent for women of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Island descent. So that means that now for all of those women across Australia this drug will be able from 16 weeks through to gestation, saving up to around $300 per treatment. I note also that Oripro has actually been supporting Australian women for over 30 years now, but this listing on the PBS will help an additional over 14,000 women to access this really important medicine. Oripro is also plant based, so it's halal and vegan friendly, making it even more accessible. In a further connection here, Oripro happens to be manufactured in my electorate of Stirling, in the suburb of Balcatta. I spoke with Stuart from Oripro yesterday and congratulated him and the company on the listing of Oripro. I'm really looking forward to getting out there to Perrigo, the manufacturer of Oripro, talking with Stuart and the rest of the team and congratulating them on the hard work that they do which is, indeed, supporting local jobs, manufacturing and, of course, this wonderful outcome where we can reduce the instances of premature births and alleviate a lot of that stress on parents at the same time. National Volunteer Week 106 10:07 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Like the member for Hindmarsh before me, I'd like to pay tribute today to the volunteers in my local community. The mayor of Logan, Darren Power, said at the quite remarkable award ceremony that he hosted on 15 May this year, 'In our community, giving and looking out for each other is second nature.' For the 34,000 volunteers in the city of Logan that is especially true. If you think about the year that we have been through, all of us together and all of our local communities, the work of our volunteers, I think, which is always important, always crucial, as you know in your community next door, Deputy Speaker Vasta, was especially important as we did what we could to back each other in, to look out for each other and to look after each other to get through the worst part of the pandemic. What we do each year in Logan city is put on a breakfast—when I say 'we', I mean the Logan City Council—with the mayor as host. It's a massive awards breakfast on the Saturday morning around Volunteer Week. This one was extra special. We had the acknowledgment of country by my friend Aunty Robyn. We had Steve Sparrow providing the music. We had MC Terry Hanson, who's always good for a laugh. We had Denise Drysdale, who's known to many members in this place, providing the gags. She even got the mayor on his feet to sing a duet, which I have not seen before and he tells me we will not see again! So it was a really enjoyable morning. More than that, it was a really special opportunity not just to recognise the 380 different volunteers that had been nominated for the various awards but to acknowledge every single one of those 34,000 volunteers who do so much to keep our community going and have done so, in many of their cases, for a really long time now. Moving around the tables at the breakfast, there were so many familiar faces, so many people to whom we owe a great deal of thanks, not just for the last year but, in many cases, for some decades. It was really good to see the Davida Steele Memorial Award presented again this year. It was presented by her daughter, Donna Rafton. It was especially pleasing to see it go to the Muslim Charitable Foundation, friends of mine, who have done and continue to do a remarkable thing for our community, so I congratulate the MCF. The Frank Lenz Memorial Award for Volunteer of the Year went to Peter Harrison-Kyte. The Spirit of Logan Award went to Melanie McKenzie. To everyone nominated, to every one of those 34,000 volunteers, to the team at Logan City Council, to all the councillors and state members who were there on the day, and the mayor in particular, well done and thanks. COVID-19: Regional Victoria 106 10:10 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls As Victoria grapples with the prospect of an extended fourth lockdown, there is a very stark choice that the Victorian government has to make today—that is, if it is going to extend this lockdown even further than beyond midnight on Thursday, is it going to continue to lock down all of the state and punish regional Victoria, even though it is hundreds of kilometres away from the nearest infection, or is it going to simply confine the lockdown to Melbourne? Last time we went through this, regional Victoria was included in the lockdown initially, so all of the state was locked down. Then, eventually, they decided to try and confine the lockdown to Melbourne. It was pathetic. It just didn't work. It's interesting that the police union have come out and said, 'If you're going to lock down Melbourne, please don't try to do this pathetic ring of steel,' better known as the 'ring of marshmallow', because they were unable to confine within Melbourne people from the dangerous spots, from the hotspots. They knew that these roadblocks on the way out of Melbourne simply didn't work. The Police Association have come up with a better way of trying to confine the residents of Melbourne to Melbourne, if that is going to be the case. They can do that by having extended breathalyser type set-ups right around the state, putting every policeman on notice to pull over anybody that they feel like, and making sure that the fines for being away from Melbourne without proper reason are quite extensive. The reason I need to push this is that regional Victoria has been very, very clear with their message that they cannot continue this blanket model of lockdown when they are literally hundreds of kilometres away from the nearest infection. The president of the Shepparton Chamber of Commerce, John Anderson, has talked about how his traders are not going to be able to survive for much longer. Yarrawonga Holiday Park manager, Sean Driscoll, is describing this as devastating. Businesspeople from Mildura and Bendigo, along with the Wodonga chief executive, have all talked about the devastating impacts that a statewide lockdown has on regional Victoria. There is no common sense associated with having people hundreds and hundreds of kilometres away from the nearest case of infection locked down in the same way that Melbourne is. Pensions and Benefits 107 10:13 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark Yet another report has been released, this time by the ANU, which explains again how raising the rate of Centrelink pensions and payments would be the most efficient way to reduce financial stress and poverty in Australia. Mind you, increasing payments above the poverty line is nothing new and echoes statements from the Business Council of Australia, the Australian Council of Social Service, Council on the Ageing, KPMG and Deloitte Access Economics, to name but a few. Yet the government continues to insist on keeping thousands of Australians in poverty, most obviously those on JobSeeker but also those relying on the age pension and DSP, for instance, who are left unable to pay bills and rent, to feed their children, to use the heater, to drive a car or to sleep at night due to fear of unexpected costs. In particular, the ANU modelling showed that lifting JobSeeker by $190 a week would dramatically reduce poverty among recipients from 88 per cent to 34 per cent. Indeed, we saw with the coronavirus supplement how increasing payments improves lives. To illustrate that, during a speech last year I tabled 56 stories, collected by the National Council of Single Mothers and Their Children, telling how these payments helped cover children's health care, TAFE fees, car repairs, healthier food and other basic needs. But now this reprieve has ended, because the Australian government cruelly reduced the rate again. There is, regrettably, more than a whiff of ideologically behind the continuing demonisation of jobseekers and the barely coded message that some Australians are living the dream, sitting on their backsides while the rest of us work hard and pay our taxes. I can tell the parliament right now that this is rubbish, because no-one wants to live in poverty. If people can work, they will work. Maybe, instead of wasting hundreds of millions of dollars on jobactive providers, which a 2019 Senate inquiry slammed as being 'not fit for purpose', the government should heed the advice of economists and put that money back into the economy through increasing Centrelink payments. Moreover, it's important to acknowledge that there are some Centrelink recipients who simply can't work—for instance, because they are full-time carers or they suffer from poor health—and that these people should feel safe, secure and supported by the government. They shouldn't live in fear of having their payments unexpectedly cut off, receiving unexplained debt or being forced to attend useless appointments for jobs they simply cannot do. As I've said countless times before, we're a rich and fortunate country. We can afford to support our most vulnerable, so let's stop messing around with people's lives, keeping them in poverty, and instead start paying Centrelink pensions and payments at a rate that people need and our lucky country can afford. Daintree Microgrid 107 10:16 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt I'm absolutely rapt to see the $19.3 million allocated in this year's federal budget to stage 1 construction of the Daintree microgrid project. This is a project that's very close to my heart and one that I've been working on delivering for close to 25 years. In fact, only last week I was reminiscing with Daintree resident Betty Hinton at Floravilla Icecream about when the journey first started. Unfortunately, three other people who were involved in those initial discussions so many years ago, John and Lynda Nicholas from the Daintree tea plantation and Betty's husband, Bill, have since passed. Sadly, John, Lynda and Bill never got the opportunity to see the idea that we'd discussed for so many years become a reality, but I have absolutely no doubt that they and many others would be elated at what we as a community have managed to achieve. The journey to this point has been a very long and frustrating one, but in the end we've got the outcome that we desired. It was stopped for quite some years by state Labor government legislation prohibiting the extension of mains-equivalent power north of the river. Fortunately, Campbell Newman, in the short time that he was there, rescinded that legislation. In 2017, the member for Kooyong, Josh Frydenberg, when he Minister for the Environment and Energy, visited the Daintree and got the ball rolling on the Daintree power grid proposal. A modest funding amount was announced during the 2019 election campaign for a scoping assessment on both costings and engineering of the project. Several months later, following a coalition victory, a contract was signed between the government and Daintree Renewable Energy Pty Ltd to take the 100 per cent renewables project to the shovel-ready stage within 12 months. Slowly but surely, the project has become a reality. Many people live in the Daintree and the wider region. Microgrid technology is becoming increasing cost-effective, creating the opportunity for reliable, low-cost, off-grid power in our regional communities. The Daintree microgrid will store energy generated by new and existing solar panels by converting it to hydrogen, generating reliable power while feeding battery storage for base-load power. It will move the World Heritage area from reliance on some six million litres of diesel fuel to a fully renewable base load, giving access to cleaner, reliable, affordable energy. Also included will be a fibre-optic cable that improves communications. The first one will be from Alexandra Range through to Cape Tribulation. In closing, I'd like to take the opportunity to personally thank long-term Daintree residents Russell and Teresa O'Doherty. They were the ones who established the Daintree Renewable Energy group. They were the ones who copped a lot of flak over many, many years for their campaign on this, but their unwavering support, their passion for making it happen and their dedication towards this project have made it a reality. Shortland Electorate: COVID-19 Vaccination 108 10:20 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland Today I provide an update on the Commonwealth's rollout of the COVID-19 vaccine in the Shortland electorate—or, I should say, rather, the lack of a rollout, as my office continues to be inundated with calls from concerned constituents, some elderly and some in the 1a category, who've not been able to be vaccinated. The Liberals love to talk about deregulation and cutting red tape; however, the example I'm about to give of a medical practice being unable to begin giving out a vaccine is unfortunately worthy of a Yes Minister episode. Lake Macquarie Medical Centre is a few blocks from my electorate office. They lodged their expression of interest in delivering the vaccine in January and are still waiting for a site registration number. Today is 2 June. It has taken nearly six months to obtain a registration number. I acknowledge that the practice did advise the Department of Health of a short deferral in order to provide their staff with the training required to administer the vaccine—a reasonable and necessary step—but they have since been continually trying to get this very significant registration number in order to begin their vaccination program. After they came to my office, inquiries were made of the minister's office. They referred us to the Vaccine Operations Centre, who provided advice that if the practice had registered an expression of interest then a registration number should be easy to obtain. The operation centre then had difficulty with this and so referred the centre on to the primary health network. This was just after my office became involved. The medical centre did the right thing in January in registering their interest. Because they also did the right thing in training their staff, they've been faced with a wall of red tape and ridiculous bureaucracy. A medical centre not being able to administer the vaccine is a big thing in any community, but in the electorate of Shortland, the sixth-oldest community in the country, it is huge, and it's just not right. Vulnerable elderly people are unable to access the vaccine because of impediments put up by this government. There are only two practices registered in the Belmont area. There are almost 15,000 people and only two practices. Never mind that the Morrison government has significantly contributed to vaccine hesitancy because of the stupid and risky statements of the Minister of Health; their health administration is actually preventing medical practices from vaccinating people and is stopping people who want to be vaccinated from doing so. As a result, they give up trying. One elderly gentleman in his 80s rang my office absolutely bewildered just last Friday. He's obviously in category 1a. His GP told him when he saw him last week that he might have more vaccine at the end of June. This is a man who wants to be vaccinated and who should have been vaccinated months ago. This government's incompetence is stopping him and many others from being able to do so. This government refuses to acknowledge that we are in a race to get every single Australian vaccinated and that it's the health of every single Australian that's being endangered by this incompetence and recklessness. Daddo, Mr Cameron Peter 108 10:23 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar I wish to bring to your attention today the contribution of Cameron Daddo not only to the screen but to music and arts in general. Many Australians, especially those from the northern beaches, would recognise him as Evan from Home and Away, but they may be surprised to know that he's also an accomplished musician, radio host and founder of a men's emotional health support network known as My Mens Team. Despite spending the last 25 years of his life living in the US, he and his wife still yearn for Australia's northern beaches and, when uprooting his family and returning home to Australia some four years ago, there was only one place they wished to return to. Daddo's career began as a model when he was just 18 years old, and it has seen him play roles in hugely successful shows such as CSI: Miami, NCIS and The Mentalist, only to now, at 56, land a role on Home and Away. When asked about life since returning to Australia, he said, 'Just can't beat it.' His decision to return to Australia wasn't without its challenges, but it was ultimately for the kids and it has proven to be a worthwhile decision. He still engages heavily with his online emotional health support network and, in addition to doing so, has begun a podcast aimed at helping those facing difficulties in marriage. He and his wife, Alison, managed to salvage a marriage that was struggling immensely and in learning from their experiences started recording and sharing separate bathrooms and other handy marriage tips. Despite everything going on in his personal life, Daddo managed to maintain his evening slot for Smooth FM and further his career both as an actor and as a musician. It is safe to say that Cameron Daddo is a successful and archetypal Australian. He has worked hard at his career and been rewarded accordingly. He has faced hardships with resilience and fortitude and come out stronger and better on the other side. He's a proud Australian. He's a proud member of the Northern Beaches community, within which I have no doubt he will continue to prosper and achieve. We in Mackellar and on the Northern Beaches should be proud to recognise him as one of our own. Stronger Communities Program 109 10:25 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin We all know, as members of parliament, just how much a little bit of money can do in local communities, particularly when it goes to organisations that rely very heavily on volunteers, so I want to talk about a few in my local electorate today. Dragons Abreast Hobart, in Tasmania, is a support group for survivors of breast cancer who get together to dragon boat. Dragon boating for breast cancer survivors was introduced to Australia, as people would know, in Darwin in 1998 following research from Canada. Now there are over 40 clubs across Tasmania. Hobart is the southernmost based club in Australia and it began in 2003. It was successful in receiving a stronger communities grant of $8,500 to replace life jackets and purchase a boat trolley to help with transporting the boats. We know that dragon boating is a great way to keep fit and socialise with others who have been through similar experiences of breast cancer. I want to say thank you to Miriam Fletcher and the whole team at Dragons Abreast Hobart for the work they do in our local community in supporting survivors of breast cancer. I look forward to visiting them soon to see how this money is working on the ground. The second one I want to talk about is Clifton Beach Surf Lifesaving Club. They were successful in receiving a $19,000 grant which is purchasing a new storage shed for equipment, including large inflatable rescue boats and rescue boards. This will go to help meeting the needs of the 350 members of the Clifton Beach Surf Lifesaving Club. I do have to fess up, I am patron of the club. I did recuse myself from the decision of our local committee to award that grant. It is tremendous to see the work that they do in local communities and so many volunteers on weekends, particularly in Tasmania where it's not that warm some weekends in summer, down on our local beaches. I want to particularly congratulate Matthew Clingeleffer, Simon Bailey, the members and the families of the local club for the great work that they do in our local community. I'm hoping to see them at the local dinner this Saturday evening. The other one I want to talk about is the Dominoes Basketball Club. The Dominoes Basketball Club received $18,500 to upgrade the members area at the Warrane Basketball Stadium. This will include renovations for storage, new flooring and shelving, a new fridge and freezer and other kitchen amenities. The club has a plan to revitalise the whole clubrooms and this grant is a great start. They also received a volunteer grant recently of $3,000. This is a great local club supporting local communities. Again, there are lots of volunteers supporting these organisations. It just could not happen without the amount of volunteers we have in our local community. I want to give a great shout out to the Treasurer, Kristy Stone, who was a finalist of the 2021 Volunteering Tasmania sport recreation and service groups volunteer award. She's done an extraordinary thing there. Congratulations also to Daniel and Angela Ogg, all the volunteers, the members and the players of the Dominoes Basketball Club in my electorate. Banks Electorate: St George Little Athletics 109 10:28 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks It's fantastic to have this opportunity to congratulate St George Little Athletics on all the great work that they do. Founded in 1971, the organisation moved to Olds Park in 1979 where they still are today. It has been fantastic, over the years, to be able to work with the President, Theo Latanis; with Geoff Lindner, the very hard-working secretary; with Sam Latanis and all the other members of the committee who do so much so that local kids can get a great start in Little Athletics. More than 200 families are involved in St George Little Athletics. Every Friday night during the season you see those kids down at Olds Park enjoying the facilities, the camaraderie, the friendship and the fitness that comes from involvement in athletics. I'm really pleased our government was able to support St George Little Athletics with a $500,000 grant to improve the facilities at Olds Park. Those facilities were, frankly, substandard. They needed to be upgraded. They hadn't been upgraded for a long time. I am really pleased that we were able to do that, with a new equipment for the field events in particular, for measurement, for improving the facilities around the amenities block and for a whole range of other activities. Congratulations to everyone in St George Little Athletics and thank you so much for everything you do in our community. I'd also like to acknowledge the Oatley Bay Scouts— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! I apologise to the member for Banks, but, it being 10.30, we'll move on to the next motion. In accordance with the resolution agreed on 13 May 2021, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. MOTIONS 110 MOTIONS Middle East 110 10:30 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler by leave—at the request of the member for Calwell, I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) recent violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories has resulted in the deaths of at least 222 Palestinians in Gaza, including 63 children, and 12 Israelis, including two children; (b) a ceasefire was declared on 20 May 2021; and (c) according to the United Nations, more than 74,000 Palestinians in Gaza were displaced from their homes during the conflict; (2) recognises that the impact of this violence is far-reaching, and that many in the Australian community are hurting at this difficult time; and (3) calls on the Government to ensure Australia is working constructively to support security and human rights in advance of a just and enduring two-state solution in the Middle East. I reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Is the motion seconded? Ms Stanley 265990 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 10:31 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell [by video link] I thank the member for Fowler. I've spoken in this parliament before about the situation in Jerusalem and the recent escalation of violence in Gaza. We've had a ceasefire since, but, tragically, we have witnessed the deaths of at least 222 Palestinians in Gaza alone, including 63 children, and 12 Israelis, including two children. It's another devastating humanitarian crisis for the people there, and we must not look at these figures in isolation. They come on top of the pervasive nature of the continued blockades in the occupation and the absence of a resolution that puts justice, dignity and human security at the heart of this conflict. Importantly, we shouldn't sanitise figures and become inured to violence, destruction, death and suffering. I invite the House to look at the list of deaths from this latest tragedy. You will notice a pattern of family members listed en masse. How devastating it is for entire generations of families to be condemned to death and wiped out in one fell swoop. This motion speaks to their memory and adds voice to the calls of the many Australians across this country who are rightly outraged—the tens of thousands who took to the streets across each of our cities; who wrote to their members of parliament; who engaged in many forms of community action, calling on the Australian government to support security, human rights and justice for the Palestinian people; and for the many Australians, including those in my electorate, who wrote to me. Those killed are not just names and numbers. The images they saw are of streets and locations and of communities they are very familiar with not only in sentiment but in actual reality of kinship and ties. One of the most devastating images to come out was that of a Palestinian child crying at the funeral of his father and brother, killed by Israeli airstrikes. He runs amidst the crowd in tears, crying hysterically, and in desperation yells: 'Goodbye, Father. I love you, my dear. I wish it was me instead of you.' And what of Nadine, a little 10-year-old Palestinian girl, one of the more than 74,000 Palestinians displaced from their homes, who stood in front of her destroyed house, crying: 'I'm only 10. I just want to be a doctor or anything to help my people, but I can't. I'm just a kid.' Why should we pay particular attention to these words? It is because they remind us that we need to step up and take a lead on peacefully and justly resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to ensure that the words of these devastated young boys and girls do not condemn yet another generation lost to the failures of the international community. It is because the consequences are far reaching, not least geopolitically, not only to that region but to the world at large. If the international community absolves itself of the responsibility to ratify its own resolutions, we risk the inevitable consequences of outbreak after outbreak, an endless cycle of violence and counterviolence. Countries such as Australia professing to be good international citizens by promoting peace-making, stability, justice and security should think about ways and means of making a direct real contribution to the peaceful and fair resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Australian government, our parliament and Australia's diplomatic community need to step up and do what we do best—get involved, get active and act as a trusted broker towards global efforts aimed at peace-making, mediation and conflict resolution. We have a long history of engagement in multilateral institutions as a middle power with a pragmatic problem-solving ethos that gives priority to our diplomatic engagements. As the motion states, we must recognise that the impact of this conflict is far reaching and that many in the Australian community are hurting at this difficult time. This hurt also extends to members of our own Jewish community, who are also very concerned, along with many Israelis who I have met who have a diversity of opinion and who are troubled by the lack of peaceful resolution to this conflict. It is the voices of these people that the government should listen to because not only does it serve to promote the long-denied justice for the people of Palestine but they strengthen the very institutions we rely on for our own peace and security and Australia's ethos as an international good citizen. 10:36 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I'm happy to rise to speak on this motion because it is important for members in this place to speak on important issues of foreign affairs that obviously translate to domestic communities within Australia. Being a representative of the third largest Jewish community in Australia, this topic is of particular importance to me. We need to acknowledge the loss of life on both sides of this recent conflict. There have been Palestinian lives lost. There have been Israeli lives lost. It's particularly sad when it comes to the context of children. But we must also always remind ourselves of the foundations of this conflict. It comes as a result of the failure of the Palestinian cause to respect a two-state solution and a pathway that recognises the right of the Jewish people in Israel as a foundational pillar for peace in the region. If that is not acknowledged and that is not accepted, it is difficult to find a scenario where people can live side by side, respecting their mutual right to self-determination, to their land, to their peace, to their security and to determine their own destiny into the future. That is the basis on which you will have a sustainable and durable peace that affects everybody and benefits everybody. That has been the position of the Australian government and continues to be the position of the Australian government, because it's a clear understanding of the foundation on which the security and the peace of all people is based. Having been to Israel and the Palestinian territories myself, as other members have done over many years, we have seen firsthand the direct consequences of what happens when people are divided about a sense of shared future and mutual respect. We all want a scenario where there is peace and stability, because it benefits everybody and removes the risks of violence against people who should otherwise be safe and secure. We have all been haunted by the images, particularly of rockets that have gone between Israel and Gaza, but we also know the origins of those rockets. The rockets that have come out of Gaza have been intercepted by the Iron Dome to protect the people of Israel and stop the loss of human life. We should be thankful that such security arrangements exist to protect people regardless of their ethnicity and regardless of their location and to ensure that people who seek peace and security in the region are not affected by rockets and do not experience the harsh consequences. Sadly, as the member moved in the motion, there have been tragic deaths on both sides of the conflict. That's a direct consequence of the attempted aggression and of Israel's right to defend itself. Ultimately, we face choices in Australia as a country and as a middle power about how we can work to aid and assist peace and stability in the region. The basis on which we do that now, and we will continue to do so, is working through multilateral institutions with other like-minded countries that want peace and stability in the region. I particularly congratulate the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Payne who have been unequivocal through the various fora—particularly the United Nations Security Council and the United Nations General Assembly—and with both Israeli and Palestinian representatives about the need to take immediate steps to halt the violence, exercise restraint and commence peace discussions. These continue to be reiterated as required, as this conflict has gone on—there is a current ceasefire, but, of course, conflict may arise again—because the position of the Australian government is one that is anchored on mutual respect and responsibility and peace and security. More critically, the foundation of the Australian policy position is the right of the Israeli people to their homelands as much as a recognition of the safety and security and the rights of the Palestinian people. We've had a number of different elections and different attitudes within Israel and, of course, amongst the Palestinian people. But we all know the foundation has to be anchored in the rights of the Israeli people and the respect by the Palestinians to the Israeli people in the same way that it should be reciprocated. It's that absence and that continued denial of the right of the people of Israel to their homeland that leads and justifies and is inflamed by those who want to take advantage and lead to conflict for their own interests and at the expense of, and with the waste of, human life, giving rise to tragedy. 10:41 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler by leave—From a very young age my upbringing caused me to know and understand that the Jews have, historically, been a much-persecuted people. Therefore, I find it easy to accept the right of the Jewish state to exist and I believe the people of Israel are entitled to live in peace. Having said that, the recent violence that we saw unfold in Israel, Gaza and Jerusalem was deeply concerning. The escalation of violence, the level of destruction and the loss of life are deeply disturbing—unacceptable and an affront to humanity. As a nation, we must be willing to stand up for human rights where we see them being oppressed, and that includes the rights of the Palestinian people. There is no justification for indiscriminate rocket attacks against Israeli citizens and the use of unlawful force or violence. I recognise that Israel has a right to defend itself and its people. However, when I saw the unwarranted and excessive force against the Palestinian protesters—innocent worshippers who were going about their prayers during the holy month of Ramadan—I was shocked and revolted. The disproportionate use of force saw 222 Palestinians killed, 1,700 injured and 74,000 Palestinians in Gaza displaced during that conflict. This death toll includes 65 children. Having said that, Israel lost 12 people who were tragically killed and two children. These incidents have had a profound impact on me because I believe every life matters—Jews and Palestinians. No fair-minded person could possibly believe that what occurred in Israel, Gaza and Jerusalem was acceptable. The situation cries out for humanity and demands the attention of the international community. While it's pleasing to see that the agreed ceasefire is holding, it is also important to note that the issues underpinning the hostilities are still not resolved. This will ultimately require goodwill and a genuine commitment to the peace process—something that, I would assert, we are yet to see. Meanwhile, the cycle of tension, the escalation of violence and the destruction are all too familiar to the Israeli and Palestinian people. I absolutely believe in the right of Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace within secure and recognised borders. That's why we must be committed to a just and enduring two-state solution based on a respect for human rights and being consistent with international law. However, I've become increasingly concerned about the hostilities in Israel's occupied territories as well as the lack of progress towards the creation of the Palestinian state, as Palestinians too have a right to exist and to enjoy statehood. We must continue to use our voice within the international community to seek an unequivocal commitment from Israel to a Palestinian state and, importantly, the reinvigoration of the peace process itself. As part of this, the issue of settlements must be addressed, as this alone continues to frustrate any efforts towards a peace process. I'd also support the call for an immediate halt to the forced evacuations in the neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah and to the ongoing forced displacements of the Palestinians from East Jerusalem. I believe it falls to countries like Australia, who believe in the dignity of all people, to become more engaged in the peace process, addressing the need for tangible progress towards the creation of a Palestinian state while ensuring respect and security for the Jewish homeland. I recognise that peace will be achieved not by statements alone but rather by a concerted international diplomatic effort. Australia has an important role to play in this discussion, not only to ensure the ceasefire remains in place but in using its influence to promote a long-term solution. I believe Israel's future depends on a peaceful relationship with its neighbours. Our thoughts and our prayers are with the Israeli and Palestinian people and their families, all of those affected in this recent violence. I end by lending support to the words of Pope Benedict: 'Let the two-state solution become a reality and not remain a dream.' 10:46 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm I'm speaking with a heavy heart on this private member's motion. The recent violence in Israel and the Palestinian territories is and should be of grave concern to all of us. Whether or not we know anyone in the affected areas or have strong feelings on the conflict, as thinking, caring human beings we should all recognise its far-reaching impact. In a statement on 12 May, Minister for Foreign Affairs Senator Marise Payne, on behalf of the Australian government, unequivocally called on all leaders to take immediate steps to halt violence, to maintain restraint and to restore calm. She said what many of us were thinking: Violence is no solution. Rocket attacks and indiscriminate acts that fuel the cycle of violence and bloodshed are never justified. More concretely, she called for a halt to actions that increase tensions, including land appropriations, forced evictions, demolitions and settlement activity, and for a halt on unilateral actions that threaten peace in the region. Those messages, as well as those of the Prime Minister, have been reiterated to both Israeli and Palestinian officials and at forums including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. Now a ceasefire has been declared and the process of getting us back to a more permanent peace can begin in earnest. The Morrison government welcomes the ceasefire and commends the Egyptian and US diplomatic efforts that led to it, including US President Biden's direct conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Palestinian Authority's President Abbas. It is imperative that the cycle of violence and bloodshed does not resume. Children in Israel and the Palestinian territories deserve a future that holds more than the prospect of perpetual conflict, destruction and loss of life. The ceasefire must continue to hold. I recognise that, while this conflict is happening far away, many in the Australian community are hurting at this difficult time. Tensions and emotions are naturally running high. Some might say that they should run high, given the seriousness of this issue, but I hope that cooler heads prevail. Compromise is not a dirty word, and calm, respectful discussion, whether it is between governments or around the dinner table here in Australia, is not a sign that you do not care—quite the opposite, in fact. It means that you recognise the gravity of the situation, the sanctity of human life and the importance of adopting a sober, rational attitude to the issues at hand. Australia joins the international community in supporting new approaches to peaceful solutions, and we add our voice of practical encouragement to those of the US, the UK, Egypt, the EU and others. The focus of all parties to the conflict must now be on a return to direct and genuine peace negotiations as soon as possible with a view to defining a just, durable and resilient peace agreement. I'm sure that all of us in this place, however we feel about who may be at fault, wish for an end to the conflict and for peace in the region. For as long as I can remember, this has seemed like an untenable dream, but it is only if we believe that it is out of reach that it will remain so. 10:51 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper I rise to support this motion. The ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian territories is complicated. It is loaded with history and littered with broken promises. It is a conflict that has been exacerbated by political leaders and extremists that have sought opportunities and division rather than negotiated outcomes. The recent fighting saw many deaths, and every death is tragic. But Israel is a major regional military power, and any conflict can only ever end badly for the Palestinian people in Gaza and the West Bank. On Saturday 22 May, I attended a rally in Melbourne calling for an end to the disproportionate response by Israel in Gaza. For doing so, I have been called anti-Semitic by some across the chamber. I reject that categorically. Opposing the current policies and actions of the Israeli government makes me no more anti-Semitic than calling out the Chinese government actions make me a Sinophobe. Israel has a right to exist peacefully and within secure and recognised borders, but Palestinians also have a right to a sustainable state within secure and recognised borders. That requires negotiation and a lot of good will. It also requires justice for Palestinians, not scraps from the table. In understanding the conflict, we cannot ignore the growing influence of ultranationalist Israeli political players and the power of the settler movement. The active resistance in Israel to the land-for-peace process has been a driving factor of the radicalisation of a new generation of Palestinians frustrated that the Oslo accords have never been implemented. UN Security Council resolution 2334, which passed unanimously in 2016, with the US abstaining, reaffirmed the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force. The resolution: 1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace; 2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem … The fourth Geneva convention makes it illegal for nations to move populations and establish settlements in territories acquired in a war, and an overwhelming number of countries consider the Israeli settlements to be illegal on this basis. But along came the Trump administration in the US, which delivered a vision for peace that favoured Israel and sidelined the Palestinians. It was a plan that effectively gave the green light for Israel to control a unified Jerusalem and annex land in the occupied territories, leave existing settlements in place, while offering the Palestinians limited sovereignty. It is little wonder the Palestinians rejected this out of hand. Remember, the genesis of the most recent conflict was the Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan evictions within East Jerusalem and the ongoing government campaign to expand settlements in the occupied territories. The Morrison government expressed zero concern at this prospect of Israeli annexation of the West Bank in 2020 and nor did the government voice any criticism of the so-called vision for peace. The reality of the peace plan is that, if only one side of the conflict supports it, there can be no peace. The Morrison government last year slashed Australia's ODA funding to the UN Relief and Works Agency in the Palestinian territories by 50 per cent. This followed the Trump administration's decision to withdraw all US funding to the UNWRA, a decision that has thankfully been reversed by the Biden-Harris administration. The Morrison government also discontinued AMENCA, an aid program established by John Howard to help Palestinian farmers become more self-reliant. And then just two weeks ago, on 14 May, Mr Morrison dishonestly claimed that the two-state solution was no longer bipartisan. This was despite the day before Labor making it clear our ongoing support for a two-state solution while joining with the foreign minister in calling for a halt to actions that increase tensions, including land appropriations, forced evictions, demolitions and settlement activity. We must never forget that Mr Morrison's prime ministership began by breaking decades of bipartisanship with the Jerusalem embassy debacle to pander for votes in the Wentworth by-election. This Prime Minister has diminished Australia's credibility on this important international issue. Resolution 2334 condemns indiscriminate acts on civilians by both sides, as do I. I welcome the proposed UN investigation into possible crimes against humanity, whether by Hamas or Israel. I'm not going to be silent about criticising actions that hamper peace. 10:56 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I'm pleased to speak on the private member's motion on recent violence in Palestine. It's been a terrible time for Palestine for a very long time. If you want to put a date on it, it goes back to 1948. However, what we saw last month in Palestine was horrific. Hundreds of Palestinians, including children and women, have been killed. Thousands have been injured. This all happened in the middle of one of the world's worst pandemics. More than 50,000 have been left homeless. Of course, Israelis did not get off scot-free. There were many injuries and deaths in Israel. We have watched the horror unfold in Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and many towns in Israel. Around Australia, people have gathered for Palestine in numbers never seen before. Fifteen thousand attended protests in Melbourne and Sydney. There have been other events in Hobart, Cairns, Darwin, Adelaide, Perth, Canberra, Brisbane, Newcastle and Wollongong to show their support for peace in that troubled land. Israel needs to be held accountable. They have the power to solve the problem. They have, hopefully, the diplomatic processes through their alliance with America to achieve this. Thousands of Palestinians have gone into the streets in a campaign to clean up the destruction caused by the latest bombings in their fair land. The slogans that has united them is, 'We will rebuild it.' Such resilience, such bravery and such determination have been witnessed. It is so very important that the cycle of violence ceases and does not resume. The ceasefire agreement must be upheld. Youth unemployment in Palestine is very high, something around 70 per cent. This cannot continue. If it does, it will only bring about more unrest. Palestinians deserve equality. The time theft that is prevalent in their society on a day-to-day basis cannot last. This is sure to bring about unrest. The apartheid culture that exists has no future. It will not bring about an amnesty. I remind Australians that Palestinian forces fought alongside Anzacs in World War I, and the Battle of Beersheba took place in southern Israel. That is, of course, a famous battle that the Allies, including Anzacs and the Palestinians won, forcing the Germans and the Ottoman Empire further north, towards Turkey. Seventeen thousand eight hundred and eighty-four Australians have written to their elected representatives calling for action. Our voices here in Parliament House are paramount so that Palestinians can achieve freedom and equality. I hope to see the fulfilment of the promise of independence made to Palestinians by the United Nations 73 years ago. I ask that we all stand for justice, fairness and equality today and stand with Palestine and Israel to bring about everlasting peace. In my two trips to Palestine and Israel, I never heard one Palestinian say to me that they wanted anything else but peace. They love the thought of peace. They want to bring their people out of the refugee camps where they have been since 1948 in some cases. All they want is peace. They realise it must seem a very complex issue for people who live outside of Israel, Palestine and Gaza, but it can be resolved. But it will need the determination and will of the people, and the Australian government can help in bringing about this peace and equality that they so deserve. 11:02 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara 'We can continue to fight. We can continue to kill—and continue to be killed. But we can also try to put a stop to this never-ending cycle of blood. We can also give peace a chance.' Those were the words spoken by the Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin after signing the Oslo Accords 26 years ago. It was a time filled with hope, optimism and potential, and, of course, it was a time that was unforgivably ripped apart by a Jewish extremist who shot and killed the Israeli Prime Minister. His assassination essentially tore up those prospects for peace. I join other members in this place in speaking about this issue. I come to it from a place of extreme distress and heartbreak in witnessing what we saw over the last month in Israel, in Gaza and in the West Bank. We all are joined in hoping that that cycle of violence is brought to an end. I do have to say that I think one of the key issues that confront this region and the Israelis and the Palestinians is trust. The Israelis are, quite rightly, nervous about what sort of response they will get from Hamas, who have launched over 4,000 rockets into civilian areas, and the Palestinian people, quite rightly, have trust issues because they have had restrictions on movements, on their living standards and on their ability to travel and work in different parts. We need to see an end to that as well. Trust takes a long time to build and it takes a very short time to be taken away. I really want to see more trust being built, slowly but surely, by both sides. Without it, there will never ever be peace, there will never ever be an opportunity for peace and there will never ever be a chance to end this devastating cycle of violence. I want to take this opportunity to send my condolences to all of the victims of the violence, especially the too many children who were killed in this conflict, especially in Gaza. Of course, we also send our condolences to the children in Israel who were caught up in this violence, as well as to the two Thai workers and the Indian national who was working in the Israeli city of Ashkelon when a rocket landed on their factory, killing her. I also need to take this opportunity to say that I think it's unfair of Australians to assume they understand all of the complexities of this conflict. It's unfair of Australians to assume that we get what life is like from the perspective of either a young Palestinian person or an Israeli person. We don't. We don't understand the complexities, we don't understand the history, and for us to cast judgement automatically is problematic in the first place. I believe it is our role, as a country, to support efforts to build trust and cooperation between these two people. I have witnessed a pretty dark side in Australia over the last month. The Jewish community in Australia has been on the receiving end of a barrage of pretty aggressive and ugly behaviour by many people in the Australian community, as if it is somehow responsible for the actions or the outcomes of the conflict on the other side of the world. I want to say here, clearly and unequivocally, that if you are making a statement about the conflict in the Middle East but you're making it to a Jewish person or a Jewish business in Australia then that is no longer a comment about the Middle East. You are making an anti-Semitic statement, and it is unacceptable to take out your anger and frustration about this conflict against Jewish people around the world. We've seen it in New York and in Europe, and, of course, in Melbourne as well, where people and businesses have been vandalised, so I have to call that out. I finish by saying that I still have hope. I still dream of the Israelis and the Palestinians one day living side by side in two states, full of peace, full of hope and full of trust. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 72184 There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Diabetes 115 11:07 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) 2021 marks 100 years since the discovery of insulin by Canadian surgeon Frederick Banting; (b) Frederick Banting along with his colleagues Professor John McLeod, medical student Charles Best and researcher Dr James Collip, solved the problem of how extracted insulin could be used to treat a person with diabetes; (c) insulin was first administered to a 14 year old boy, Leonard Thompson at the Toronto General Hospital—it was lifesaving for Leonard and for millions of others diagnosed with diabetes over the ensuing years; and (d) for their discovery, Banting and McLeod won the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine in 1923 and shared their prize money with Best and Collip; (2) recognises that: (a) diabetes is a serious and complex metabolic disease that affects the lives of many Australians; (b) more than 1.4 million Australians currently have diabetes and are registered with the National Diabetes Services Scheme (NDSS); and (c) Australians like Anna Moresby, who was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes as a child during World War 2, can live long and productive lives because of the discovery of insulin—Anna has just received a Kellion Victory Medal for living with diabetes for 80 years; and (3) acknowledges that: (a) the Government has a long-standing commitment to the NDSS, established in 1987, which assists people with diabetes to self-manage their diabetes through provision of subsidised insulin pen needles and pump consumables, glucose monitoring strips, continuous glucose monitors and flash monitors, and important information, resources, education and support programs and other services; (b) there has been strong bi-partisan support for the NDSS; and (c) since its inception the NDSS supports all people with diabetes all over Australia, including children with type 1 diabetes and families, young adults, women with diabetes in pregnancy and over 450,000 people who currently use insulin to help manage their diabetes. In 1921, insulin was discovered by Canadian surgeon Frederick Banting and, along with Professor John Macleod, Charles Best and Dr James Collip, he shared in the Nobel Prize in 1923. Since that point in time, 100 years ago, insulin has saved hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of lives. It was one of the great scientific breakthroughs of its time. Despite that, diabetes is still with us today, in perhaps even greater numbers. In fact, the latest numbers I have seen show that the incidence of diabetes worldwide is still increasing, and that is of great concern. I thank successive Australian governments for their support of the diabetes community. The current minister, Greg Hunt, has been a very passionate and helpful person in getting the requests of the diabetes community dealt with by government, certainly in the areas of the National Diabetes Services Scheme, the national plan, the insulin pumps, the constant glucose monitors, the FreeStyle Libre devices that are now being provided and the extension of services to rare forms of diabetes. I've told a story in this place before of meeting a young family with a baby that had diabetes that did not qualify for a constant glucose monitor. I went to see the minister and basically, with the stroke of a pen, he fixed it for about 13 families around Australia. That's the kind of response I really appreciate and the diabetes community appreciates. There's been strong support from the government for medical trials, and that continues. The member for Moreton and I are the co-chairs of the 'parliamentary enemies of diabetes'. In the time we have been there, it has been a rewarding thing for us to do. We have been pleased with what governments have done for diabetes. We don't claim to be the sole authors of every success, but we're certainly there with our shoulders to the wheel. The figures show that 1.4 million Australians are on the National Diabetes Service Scheme, and it is thought that there would be another maybe one million people who are undiagnosed at this stage. It is sad to report that it is seats like my seat of Grey, in outer regional Australia, where that incidence is the highest. I do not have the latest numbers, but a few years ago Grey had the highest instance of diabetes across the nation. It's certainly a frontline concern for me. Without doubt, it affects the Indigenous population, particularly in remote communities, even worse than it affects the mainstream population. About 30,000 people a year in Australia take insulin for the first time. Worldwide—and these are the figures I wanted to touch on—it's estimated that one in 11 adults have diabetes. That is 415 million people, and about half of those are undiagnosed. Half a million children in the world have type 1 diabetes. And it's worsening. The International Diabetes Federation estimates that, by 2040, 10 per cent of the world's population—one in 10—will have diabetes. This is diabolical. That's why we need to keep spending money on those medical trials. Certainly the medical trials are largely aimed at type 1 diabetes, and that is not the predominant number. It is type 2 diabetes which is causing the most havoc around the world. Sadly, while there are no silver bullets in this game, a lot of the causes of type 2 diabetes are well-known: it's lifestyle, it's diet and it's exercise, and the solutions are within reach of those people who suffer. Getting that message out there and getting people to understand that they are in a powerful enough position to do something about it is the real challenge, and we shall have to keep at that work. I'm going to end my comments on this motion by restating something I normally say when I speak about diabetes. Diabetes in Australia is the leading cause of coronary heart disease, it is the leading cause of blindness and it is the leading cause of amputation. It's a darn good thing to avoid, if you can, and, particularly in the case of type 2, a lot of people could. I ask them all to be in touch with their doctor, get screened, get their eye screenings, check out where their health is and do something about it. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Is there a seconder for the motion? 11:12 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I'm pleased to second the motion moved by the member for Grey and to speak in support of it. We are the co-chairs of the Parliamentary Friends of Diabetes, or should I say 'enemies of diabetes'. Since there's nobody listening and nobody taking a record, I would say that the member for Grey is a good bloke and very easy to work with, but hopefully no-one has taken that down! The Diabetes Australia website refers to insulin as the holy grail of diabetes treatment, and it's not an overstatement. Insulin keeps more than one million Australians alive, and this year marks 100 years since insulin was discovered by Canadian researcher Frederick Banting and his colleagues Professor John McLeod, medical student Charles Best and researcher Dr James Collip. Together they received the Nobel Prize for their wonderful discovery, because it was a game changer for people living with diabetes. Type 1 diabetes is not linked to modifiable lifestyle factors, and today—although hopefully one day—there is no cure for type 1 diabetes and it cannot be prevented. A healthy lifestyle can only help to manage type 1 diabetes. A new report by the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation, released yesterday, found that type 1 diabetes costs the Australian economy about $2.9 billion a year. They found that increased access to diabetes technology and treatments could reduce that cost significantly. Forty per cent of people with type 1 diabetes develop complications such as blindness, require amputations or suffer from cardiovascular disease, and 21,000 people are hospitalised every year due to hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia. The lifetime cost of type 1 diabetes with complications is about $738,000. As well as being the co-chair, with the member for Grey, of Parliamentary Friends of Diabetes, I have a personal interest in promoting awareness of this chronic condition. My mum had type 2 diabetes. Just a few weeks ago it was a decade, amazingly, since Peggy passed away. A mother of 10 children, she is still missed by all of us. I often associate Canberra with Mum, because I used to call her a lot when I was here, rather than when I was busy with kids at home. I still miss her, and she inspired me to be a part of this group. Type 2 diabetes represents around 85 to 90 per cent of all diabetes cases. There are some markers that make it more likely that you will develop type 2 diabetes: if you're over 45, if there's a family history of diabetes, if you are from one of certain ethnic backgrounds, if you suffer from high blood pressure, or if you're overweight or obese. Despite this checklist, many people who develop type 2 diabetes have no symptoms at all. For some, the first sign may be a complication, such as a heart attack, a vision problem or a foot ulcer, connected with diabetes. As I said, there's no cure for type 2 diabetes, so prevention is crucial, as outlined by the member for Grey. Thankfully, there is very strong evidence that we can prevent it in up to 60 per cent of cases, but we are not yet approaching this benchmark in Australia. People at risk of type 2 diabetes can delay or prevent its onset by maintaining a healthy weight—always a struggle for politicians—undertaking regular physical activity, making healthy food choices, managing their blood pressure, managing their cholesterol levels and giving up smoking. The National Diabetes Services Scheme, the NDSS, established in 1987 by the Hawke Labor government, has ever since had bipartisan commitment from successive governments. The NDSS is administered with the assistance of Diabetes Australia and assists people with diabetes to self-manage their diabetes. It does that through the provision of subsidised insulin pen needles, insulin pump consumables, glucose monitoring strips, continuous glucose monitors and flash monitors, and lots and lots of very useful information. Diabetes has a wider impact than just on those who suffer with the disease. It affects other family members, friends, teachers and employees, who all need to be aware of the support that sufferers need. We need a national type 2 diabetes prevention program to help prevent people developing type 2 diabetes. We need a prevention workforce of health professionals trained and certified in diabetes risk assessment and prevention in every state and territory. A range of suitable health professionals from fields including nursing, dietetics, physiotherapy, exercise physiology, pharmacy and psychology, as well as Aboriginal health workers, should be included. The goal of any program would be to slow the growth of the obesity epidemic—or tsunami—which is the main driver of type 2 diabetes, and we need to prevent low-risk individuals from moving into that high-risk category. That's the low-hanging fruit—healthy fruit, I'm talking about, obviously. If you develop type 2 diabetes, eating well and exercising are very important management tools. It's important to keep blood glucose levels in the target range to prevent short-term and long-term complications. As the member for Grey so clearly stated, diabetes is an epidemic not only in this country but across the whole world. We need to tackle diabetes head-on, for all our sakes. 11:18 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne I rise in support of this motion. Diabetes is a scourge of the modern world. It's been around for a long time but it's rising. I'd like to compliment both the previous speakers on their contributions. For those Australians who aren't diabetics, I'll provide just a bit of explanation. Diabetes is when your sugar goes too high because either you have run out of insulin, which comes from your pancreas, or you have resistance to the effects of insulin—you might have hyperinsulinemia and resistance to it working. The latter is type 2 diabetes. The first condition, when there's no insulin, is an autoimmune condition. Juvenile onset diabetes is when your own immune system inflames and takes away the cells in your pancreas that make the insulin—so sugar goes up, insulin comes out and it comes down. There are other hormones in your gut and your body that help control that, there are incretin mimetics and there are wonderful drugs—insulin tablets that lower your blood sugar and reduce insulin resistance—but diabetes is a scourge on the health of everyone who gets it. The best prevention for that type 2 is to stay fit and healthy, and to eat good food. In my 35 years or so of practice, I always told patients about the three programs that will address the obesity problem in the Western world in particular. The first one is the ELF program—the eat-less-food program; the second program is the DME program—the do-more-exercise program; and the last, and the accessory program, is the DLG program—drink-less-grog! If you do that and do exercise you will be a lot healthier and will probably reduce your risk of getting diabetes as a result. The other thing that we need to highlight is that in Australia we have the National Diabetes Services Scheme, which has been around since the late 1980s. It is federal government funded and a lot of the services are delivered by another jewel in Australia, and that is Diabetes Australia. Every state has a state based Diabetes Australia—for example, in New South Wales and the ACT. They offer oodles of support, help and practical knowledge to people who become diabetic. The National Diabetes Services Scheme is administered by them in some states and also delivered by pharmacies, where you can get things like free syringes, or you get reduced and subsidised prices for things like insulin pumps and continuous blood glucose monitoring. The care that you get in Australia for diabetes, compared to that in some other nations, is exemplary. But that's because we have a wonderful, strong health system in this country. In the eight years that I've been here the coalition government has totally expanded the reach of our health system, nowhere better than with all the wonderful drugs that are available for diabetes. The incretin medics are an example of a class of drugs which are going to help weight loss. These try to get the natural got hormones which interact with the pancreas active. These can be via tablet or injection. There are breakthrough ones coming in the pipeline that will actually control this, with exercise and a sensible diet, with between 17 and 30 per cent weight loss. That's better than what all these gastric bypass operations are doing. That's in the pipeline. There are so many things, but the practical help that people get out of the NDSS and through the organisations that deliver a lot of these services is exemplary. I don't know how it would have been to be diabetic before those two initiatives. I went to school with some colleagues who were diabetic, and it was a real nightmare for them. We always used to think: 'Oh my God! These poor guys have to stick needles in themselves twice a day!' Some of my friends at boarding school would freak out, seeing them inject themselves. It put them to the side a bit, 'Oh, he's one of those guys who sticks needles himself.' But now people understand that juvenile-onset diabetes or the autoimmune type isn't someone's fault; you just get it. It's just bad luck. Like many things in life, you get a disease because you run into a bad microbe or you didn't choose your grandparents or your genes very well, because you inherited it. Or it's just bad luck—you run into a bad microbe that does things. So this is a thing to be celebrated. Thank God that we have Diabetes Australia and the National Diabetes Services Scheme! (Time expired) 11:23 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga [by video link] Thank you to all the previous speakers on this important motion. I thank the member for Gray for moving the motion and the member for Moreton for his work in this space. We're facing a diabetes epidemic across Australia, and there is more work for us to do in both preventing and treating diabetes. There are more than 1.4 million Australians with diabetes, and 120,000 of those have type 1 diabetes. Some 280 Australians develop diabetes every day and there are a lot of Australians who have diabetes which are as yet undiagnosed—the estimate is about half a million—so we need to do much better at diagnosing it and telling people to get tested for diabetes. Since 2001, the prevalence of diabetes amongst Australians over 18 has almost doubled. It's clear that something is happening here. Diabetes is rising, so we do need to significantly increase awareness of diabetes in our health discussions, particularly so that we can do some of the prevention work for type 2 diabetes. There was a particular reason that I wanted to speak on this private member's motion today: I have personal experience with diabetes. Last year I was diagnosed with gestational diabetes when I was pregnant with my son. Gestational diabetes is the fastest-growing type of diabetes in Australia, and it affects thousands of pregnant women. It usually occurs around the 24th to 28th week of pregnancy, and women who have had gestational diabetes have an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes later in life. For me, being diagnosed with gestational diabetes was quite a surprising diagnosis. I've tended to have a fairly healthy diet and an active lifestyle, so I felt quite shocked and surprised. I do want to say to pregnant women out there who are diagnosed with gestational diabetes: this is not a personal judgement on you. I know it can be hard when you're pregnant and you feel like you need to be doing the absolute best for your unborn baby. It's not about you. There are underlying factors that put you at risk. I got used to monitoring my glucose and managed my diabetes through some small changes to my diet, but other women do have a more difficult process. We do know that gestational diabetes can develop if you've had gestational diabetes in a previous pregnancy; if you're older, especially over 40 years of age; if you're from an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander background; if you're from a Melanesian, Polynesian, Indian subcontinent, Middle Eastern or Asian background; if you've had elevated blood glucose levels in the past; if you have a family history of type 2 diabetes; if you're above the healthy weight range; if you have polycystic ovary syndrome; if you have gained weight too rapidly in the first half of pregnancy; if you have had a large baby or complications in a previous pregnancy; or if you are taking some types of steroid medications. There are a wide range of risk factors, and that's probably why we are seeing the incidence of this type of diabetes rise so quickly. I do want to commend the work that is going into both diagnosing and treating this type of diabetes and helping pregnant women manage gestational diabetes through their pregnancy. It is obviously incredibly important that they do get access to some of the things that previous speakers have been talking about—the tools that help them manage their blood sugar levels and help them understand how diet and exercise may be part of this and how taking medication, if necessary, may be part of this. So it is entirely appropriate that today the House recognises the significance of it being 100 years since the discovery of insulin. This discovery by Frederick Banting all those years ago means that people in our community today can lead long and fulfilling lives with diabetes, and that is a wonderful thing. But, as previous speakers have said, we do have more work to do when it comes to both preventing, treating and supporting people with diabetes. That does include making sure that people have access to the support and technology they need. I commend the community campaign by Australians with type 1 diabetes to have continuous glucose monitoring technology included in the NDSS. That is a really important development. We do need more focus on preventing type 2 diabetes. Unlike type 1 diabetes, there are factors that can be identified early. We need to really shift the discussion from treatment once diagnosed to understanding what causes type 2 diabetes and getting in early to prevent it. I hope that that's something that the people in this place can turn our attention to and that we can support health authorities and health systems across our country to make that shift to prevention so that we can treat this diabetes epidemic. 11:28 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong Diabetes is an epidemic in Australia. According to JDRF, 127,000 Australians are afflicted with type 1 diabetes. Around 25,000 Australians are in the early stages or are undiagnosed. JDRF believes diabetes cost the governments and individuals $2.1 billion in 2020 alone. These figures are staggering. While the numbers are huge, it's pleasing to note that diabetes is treatable and, perhaps remarkably, has been for a century. Back in 1921 when the world was fighting the last global pandemic, Canadian surgeon Frederick Banting discovered insulin and worked out the important role it played in preventing diabetes. Banting and his colleagues won the Nobel Prize for the effort, and millions of people around the world would agree that they were incredibly worthy recipients. While this first breakthrough was incredible and comparatively trailblazing in our early understanding of medicine, the diabetes world has not stood still. Insulin has been synthesised, continuous glucose monitoring has come in, and we're starting to see the advent of continuous monitoring combined with automatic insulin pumps which will essentially function as artificial pancreases. I'm happy to say that the technological boom which we have seen in recent years is centred in Macquarie Park in Bennelong. We're home to Abbott, who make their FreeStyle glucose monitors which are removing the constant finger prick blood tests which are the bane of diabetics' lives. We also have Medtronic, who make the first diabetes pump available in Australia. Johnson & Johnson, who make a variety of diabetes devices, is based in Bennelong. None of these devices are any good without insulin to deal with the condition, which is where our pharmaceutical companies come in. Again, Bennelong is home to some of the biggest players in this market. Sanofi is one of the largest global insulin manufactures, and Eli Lilly has been part of the synthetic insulin process since the very beginning. Diabetes treatment is currently experiencing a technological revolution. Established therapies are changing the lives of people with diabetes. If anything, the speed of this revolution is creating problems, as our bureaucracy struggles to keep up with the huge pace of innovation. I have had representations from people seeking access to a Bluetooth enabled tube feed insulin pump, Omnipod, which was approved by the TGA over a decade ago but remains unavailable here in Australia. Until it is approved and on the prosthesis list, the only way to get the treatment is to travel to Dallas, Texas, after receiving special approval—a long, expensive and arduous journey both in the physical and bureaucratic sense. This is clearly not feasible for many people with this condition. This is an example but certainly not the only innovative medicine or treatment that is coming down the pipeline. We need to have a regulatory process that is transparent and more agile to ensure that Australians aren't continuing to miss out when life-changing treatments are made available. That said, one of the great innovations in recent years has been continuous glucose monitoring, CGM. Continuous and flash glucose monitoring is clinically proven to reduce average blood glucose concentrations, helping patients maintain a healthy range and avoid hypo- and hyperglycaemic events. Better glucose control is associated with better health. JDRF suggests that every dollar spent on CGM provision comes back 1.5 times, which will also go a long way to making up the huge economic cost of diabetes in Australia. The CGM Initiative, which was introduced in 2017, provides fully subsidised CGM products to those people with highest clinical and financial need, with approximately half of all Australians with type 1 diabetes now eligible to receive these products completely free of charge. The NDSS and CGM initiatives are underpinned by the Australian National Diabetes Strategy 2016-20, which was released on 13 November 2015. What is really required now is commitment and leadership to shift the standard of care from outdated technology to the new standard of care. The government is currently updating the strategy to ensure it remains current and adaptive to the changes in the health environment that have occurred since its release. It is anticipated the updated strategy will be available mid-2021— (Time expired) 11:34 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins The high quality of medical care we enjoy today is built on years of efforts of physicians, scientists, PhDs and other medical professionals investigating the causes of and potential treatments for disease. The tireless efforts of these professionals have changed diseases and conditions from life threatening to life changing, and one of these particular conditions is of course diabetes. The story of the life-changing treatment for diabetes is really one of the extraordinary things we should celebrate in the history of medical research and, indeed, medicine. One hundred years ago it was very rare for someone with type 1 diabetes to live for more than one year, and I really welcome the member's motion with regard to raising awareness of this life-changing discovery for literally millions of people all around the world. It was in 1921 that Canadian surgeon Frederick Banting, along with Professor John Macleod, medical student Charles Best and researcher Dr James Collip, discovered insulin. They were able to administer extracted insulin to Leonard, a 14-year-old boy at Toronto General Hospital, who lay dying from diabetes. Almost immediately, his condition dramatically improved. It must have been an incredibly extraordinary moment to see children almost rising from their beds. I understand that children were dying in Toronto hospital, and basically Banting, Best and Collip went from bed to bed of dying children, injecting the entire ward with insulin. Before they had reached the last child, some were literally awakening from comas. Every person in that room must have felt they were part of a miracle, a life-saving discovery for Leonard and for millions of others diagnosed with diabetes globally over the last century. Banting and Macleod won the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1923, just two years later. It was an extraordinarily short period of time to be recognised for this extraordinary discovery. They shared their prize money with the student and researcher, Best and Collip, respectively, which is more than appropriate. I will say as a paediatrician that, having seen the impact that diabetes can have on the lives of children, it is truly life-changing, and we must recognise that medical research has provided hope and life extension for this amazing condition that basically has changed from being one that kills children to one that completely supports them. But of course diabetes is not just about type 1 diabetes, which is a condition that occurs early in life. We don't know why children develop type 1 diabetes. It's a very frightening condition. It has a very sudden onset and can become an emergency. Children can turn up in a coma in an emergency ward, and doctors have to work very quickly to save their lives. Of course, there's also another condition, which is called type 2 diabetes, and this is completely different. It has a later onset and is associated with increasing rates of obesity around the world. It is something that we can do more about preventing through actions taken to increase weight reduction and through other lifestyle factors such as improved exercise. More than 1.4 million Australians suffer from diabetes, and that is why the government supports these Australians through the subsidy of essential medicines like insulin under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and of other products through the National Diabetes Services Scheme, established in 1987. The NDSS, as it's known, provides reliable and affordable accession and products such as insulin, pen needles, pump consumables and glucose monitoring devices as well as education and support programs. The continuous glucose monitoring initiative was introduced in 2017 and provides fully subsidised continuous glucose monitoring products to those people so they don't have to test their blood with a finger prick. I can tell you that children love it. Finger pricks used to be the bane of families' lives, and to have this monitoring product really does bring comfort to millions of families with young children right around the world. I know so many families and friends affected by this. The Australian government has invested over $300 million over four years in the CGM initiative for this life-changing product. We continue to improve our technologies, our devices and our approach to supporting diabetes because investing in health and medical research is a priority for the Morrison government. Research is a key pillar of our plan to help keep Australians safe. Just like Banting and Macleod, this investment continues to help millions of people around the world. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 72184 There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Volunteer Organisations 120 11:39 Ms OWENS E09 Parramatta I move: That this House: (1) acknowledges the almost 6 million Australian volunteers who contribute 600 million hours each year to help others through secular and faith-based volunteering organisations; (2) notes that: (a) in early 2020, two out of every three volunteers cut back their hours, including many older volunteers who had to self-isolate, leaving charities short by an estimated 12.2 million hours per week; and (b) only around one in four volunteer organisations managed to get volunteer participation back to pre-pandemic levels of activity by the start of 2021; (3) recognises that while volunteering organisations have been supporting much greater numbers of people in need with fewer resources during the coronavirus pandemic, there was nothing in the Government's latest budget for volunteers; and (4) calls on the Government to get behind our volunteer organisations and make sure they have the resources they need to continue their important work. When you're lucky enough to be elected as a member of parliament you meet the best people, people who volunteer, give their time and capacity every day to help others. And in this time of COVID I particularly want to pay tribute to the six million Australian volunteers who contribute around 600 million hours each year to helping others. They are the backbone of our secular and our faith-based community organisations. This became all the more obvious during the coronavirus pandemic when volunteering organisations stepped up when the Morrison government was absent. In my electorate volunteers mobilised to feed thousands of people, including temporary visa holders, international students, refugees and asylum seekers who received no support from the government when they lost work last year. Unfortunately, for most organisations this has meant doing more with less because as demand shot up many volunteers had to opt out. In early 2020 two out of every three volunteers cut back their hours, including many older volunteers who had to self-isolate, leaving charities short by an estimated 12.2 million hours per week. Only around one in four organisations were able to get volunteer participation back to pre-pandemic levels of activity by the start of this year. I give my profound thanks to all of those individuals and organisations who stepped into the gap last year and who continue to do so at a time that is still of great need in our community. When COVID hit hard last year there were huge gaps in the support that the Morrison government gave. We saw gaps in support for temporary visa holders, international students, refugees and asylum seekers and a number of organisations stepped in. The Sathya Sai organisation, which was established in 1960s by Sathya Sai Baba, is an organisation dedicated to providing service activities for people as a means for spiritual advancement. They participated in an interesting way last year. They stepped into the middle. Volunteers from the youth wing of Sri Sathya Sai International collected donations of staple foods like rice and flour from the front door of people's homes and distributed those to other organisations who would package them up for distribution to the community. A really interesting approach, stepping into a gap that existed, providing support to organisations who worked on the frontline. I thank the youth wing of Sri Sathya Sai International for an extraordinary contribution. I know that their service continues. It's a really extraordinary contribution at a time of great need. An organisation that stepped into the gap last year when so many people were left behind was the Tamil Friends of Labor. With support from Sri Sathya Sai and the Tamil Resource Centre at Pendle Hill, volunteers at Tamil Friends of Labor delivered thousands of emergency food parcels last year. For the most part the parcels went to people who had been left out of the support packages. These included refugees, asylum seekers and temporary visa holders—people who received no support from the government during the pandemic. I put my hand up to help with some of the deliveries—many, many others did too. They put in many more hours than I did, but in that short period I met people who'd been working in local restaurants who were the first to lose their jobs when the lockdown started, people let go because they weren't eligible for JobKeeper. I met one young refugee family living in a share house in Granville with a newborn baby. His dad had lost his job when COVID struck—one month before the baby was born. There was no money left for food and nappies. They were sharing that two bedroom house with two other families. Thank you so much to Tamil Friends of Labor for the work they did. I met so many people who were really struggling. It was a small amount of help but help that really made a difference. I also want to talk about Parramatta Mission, one of the mainstays in my community that provides meals—breakfast, lunch—and other emergency services to people in most need. Their demand for services, including cooked meals and food, had absolutely skyrocketed when COVID struck. Like so many organisations, their regular volunteers are retirees so during the lockdown they lost most of them overnight. At the same time demand for their services skyrocketed. There was a 25 per cent increase in new people accessing their services and a 40 per cent increase in demand for food hamper relief. When the queues stretched outside the Centrelink office volunteers went down to tell people in the queue that they were there if they were needed. They met one man who, as soon as they spoke, broke down in tears because he'd never been out of work and had no idea how to feed his family. I thank Parramatta Mission and all the other volunteers so much for their efforts. They were absolutely there when our community needed them and we wouldn't have got through it without them. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 72184 Is there a seconder for the motion? Mr Khalil 101351 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 11:44 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I want to thank the member for Parramatta for bringing this important motion—not necessarily for everything that she said, but I don't think that would come as any great surprise to the member for Parramatta. But the underlying philosophy of her motion is a very important one, and that is: where would we be without our volunteers in this country? Recently we celebrated National Volunteer Week, and on 17 May 2021 I had about 50 representatives of various volunteer groups come to the deck just below my office on Lake Kawana. If you get a chance, Mr Deputy Speaker, come to this spot. It's an absolute paradise in the best electorate in the country. I told those volunteers that today there are six million volunteers working in Australia and they volunteer about 600 million hours each year. I did some very quick back-of-the-envelope maths. Calculating on an average of about $80 an hour for wages and on costs, it's a $48 billion saving to governments. That's $48 billion that we as taxpayers don't need to pay, all because of the generosity of some six million Australians. Locally on the Sunshine Coast, we've got about 26,000 volunteers working in 131 volunteer organisations. For anybody who is not a volunteer, I want to send out this challenge to you: volunteer, whether it's in a surf lifesaving club or in a croquet club. It doesn't matter what it is. Do it not just for the community in which you work but because you will get benefits yourself—the benefits you obtain by volunteering, the act of providing services without getting a financial reward. It's the warm and fuzzy benefit. You do get that warm and fuzzy feeling. It's good for your mental health to feel that you are part of something much bigger than yourself. I've been involved in many different community organisations. I joined my first organisation as a volunteer when I was 14, and I've been a volunteer ever since, and I know that many people in this place would be the same. I want to thank the volunteers of Fisher. I want to thank all the volunteers of this country, who give up so much of their time. Not only are they doing that for the benefit of their community but their federal government is absolutely working alongside them, and we do that by providing various grants. I want to just spend a couple of moments talking about some of the programs that we run. Since 2016, 60 grants under the Stronger Communities Program have been provided to organisations in my electorate, totalling some $1.1 million. This includes $9,000 for the Met-Cal Surf Life Saving Club for a new patrol trailer and $13,775 for the RoboCoast Sunshine Coast Robotics Association, an absolutely amazing organisation led by volunteers who teach kids how to build robots. Then they compete against each other, and schools from every state come together on the Sunshine Coast and have these amazing robot competitions. To see these kids, some in their primary school years, actually making robots is really quite amazing. There is $13,500 for Montville Village Association for the construction of a covered deck and the upgrade of disability access to the heritage listed Montville Village Hall. Since 2016, 70 volunteer grants of up to $5,000 have helped with things like fuel, training and equipment costs. There is $5,000 for the Maleny Light Horse regiment, who were at the Maleny Show just a couple of days ago. There is $4,740 for Bamboo Projects Education for Mooloolaba volunteers. There is $4,990 for the Caloundra Committee of Service to the Ageing. We all have stories about how the government's grants programs have helped volunteers. Every single member in this place, from across the country, has benefited from it, and when I say that I mean the community has benefited from it. This government will continue to work for volunteers and work with them. 11:50 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce It'd be difficult to overstate how important the contribution of volunteers is to communities across Australia, and I thank the member for Parramatta for bringing this motion. These include charities, soup kitchens, school working bees, school class aides and driving people to appointments in my electorate. There's a great program that helps young people get their driving hours up to get their licence if they don't have access to a car. There are environment land care groups and English language lessons and conversation classes. I remember talking to my mum when she was dying. I nursed her for 10 months at home when she was dying from cancer. One of her funnier regrets, I remember, was when she said she was never going to live to fulfil her dream of being an op-shop lady. She died just as she turned 70. She'd moved house and she had already scouted out the op-shops around the corner. She loved an op-shop. She'd come back and say, 'Look, I saved $10.' I think I said, 'I think you wasted $6, Mum, but there you go.' Six million Australians volunteer every year across Australia. That's a $200 billion contribution to the Australian economy. Unfortunately with COVID we have seen two-thirds of volunteers cut their hours and, in particular, many older volunteers have not returned. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 11:51 to 12:07 Mr HILL 86256 I recently visited South East Volunteers. They're a wonderful organisation in south-east Melbourne serving about six councils, including the City of Greater Dandenong and the City of Casey in any electorate. Most importantly, their core service is place based volunteering. That involves face-to-face conversations between a volunteer, or a potential volunteer, and a worker from the service. It's human-to-human interaction. I saw this firsthand when I visited the Narre Warren office with May, the coordinator there, who's there a day or two a week, and the CEO, Ann Burgess. They get to know volunteers. They assess their suitability, their interests and the things they might be good at and they match them with local organisations. It's local people and local organisations. In particular, this face-to-face service is critical for people who might have difficulties with English or who may actually just be shy. Many volunteers are shy. They might be introverted and need that extra help. Or they might not be confident with a computer. This is why it's so shocking that, in this budget, the Liberal government are cutting nationally all funding to place based volunteer services from 30 June this year. They tried this a couple of years ago. We had a debate about it in this very chamber. Afterwards, Liberal MPs said, 'I didn't know we were doing this.' Magically, behind the scenes, they backed off until after the election—but they're back and at it again. They're cutting all of the funding nationally to place based volunteer services and they're replacing it with a website in Canberra. There will be no more core funding to support local people to be matched to local organisations in this country. This will mean that numerous small local volunteering services, where this is pretty much the only funding they get, will close, especially in regional areas. They will be replaced with a website in Canberra. This website idea was tried over 10 years ago. It failed—it didn't work—which is why we went back to place based services. The government have learnt nothing. If people say, 'We haven't heard of this. Where did this come from?' it's because the government are trying to sneak it through. They're buying off the peak bodies with one year of transitional funding. Volunteering Victoria is getting a year of transitional funding. The government will dole a bit of that out to try and shut people up until after the election, but services cannot use this transitional funding for core work. It can now only be used for the three so-called priority groups: First Nations people, people with a disability and new migrants. In my part of Melbourne, my part of Australia, that's pretty much their main bread and butter. Last year they helped new migrants from 102 different countries. That's what they already do, but they're not going to get this money anymore. The government's going to be putting it out in a tender. We don't know how this tender will work, but you can bet your bottom dollar, based on this government's track record, that local services won't get a look-in. I bet the job networks will be lining up those private providers to put in the tender and get this money—or one big charity the government favours or a private company. Every time the government has done so-called reform of local services, whether it's emergency relief funding, where, under Tony Abbott, they cut every dollar to local emergency relief services, they have scrapped translation services for people who don't speak English, and now they're attacking volunteering. They come after the small local organisations and hand it out to two or three or four big national groups with a big logo, and it doesn't land in local communities. So I condemn the government for this charade of cutting all funding to local volunteering services nationally. 12:11 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner Today I rise to speak on the Morrison government's unwavering support for Australian volunteers. The motion those opposite have presented is completely unfounded. The Morrison government provides $10 million a year for grassroots volunteer grants to assist our volunteers and encourage volunteering in our local communities. As for 2021 volunteer grants, this has been doubled to $20 million in funding, which has now commenced, with the outcomes to be announced later this year. This funding is available to every electorate across the country—equal support for all our volunteers nationwide. Now in its sixth year, the very popular Stronger Communities Program, which was introduced by our government, provides grants of between $2½ thousand and $20,000 to community organisations, delivering social benefits for locals. As part of this program, I recently had the pleasure of visiting Ocean Crusaders in my electorate of Bonner, who were awarded $20,000 for the installation of an automatic bottle cap washing machine. Based in Hemmant, this charity organisation specialises in cleaning our waterways, particularly through their Caps Crusade initiative. This funding is a game changer for their volunteers, making sure they can clean bottle caps even quicker and get cleaner plastic back on the market for reuse. Then there's our government's Powering Communities Program, which, in 2021, will fund up to 12 projects worth $68,000 in my electorate of Bonner, helping community organisations and their hardworking volunteers lower their energy bills. With all this funding, it's clear that supporting volunteers isn't just important; it's essential to the Morrison government. Recognising how hard this sector has been working through the COVID-19 pandemic, the Morrison government stepped up and provided an additional $3.2 million through volunteering peak bodies. This was on top of the $10 million annual volunteer grants round and the $6.6 million one-off funding included as part of the latest budget for the redesigned volunteer management activity. Does this sound like a government that isn't supporting our volunteers? The Morrison government is securing Australia's recovery and getting the volunteering sector back on its feet. The Morrison government recognises these local organisations have strengthened our communities for decades. We are equipping volunteers with tools and resources that they need on the ground. We are promoting awareness for volunteer groups in our local communities. The Morrison government has our volunteers covered. As part of last year's volunteer grants, I awarded funding to 16 local community organisations, including supporting clubs, Rotary, Scouts and many others. These grants were between $1,000 to $5,000, to best support their work on the ground. Wynnum Manly District Cricket Club was a recipient of a $5,000 grant. This has enabled big changes for the club. It has meant that they could upgrade the scorers' room with new furniture and air conditioning, which, during a Queensland summer cricket season, is invaluable to the volunteers who keep the runs ticking over for the club. We all know the amazing work that Meals On Wheels provides to our senior community members, giving them the power to live independently for longer. I've been privileged to work alongside Meals On Wheels in Mount Gravatt several times. The volunteers are at the heart of this group, and they are second to none. So I was very happy to recently announce that they were successful in receiving a $5,000 volunteer grant. Deputy Speaker Bird, as you know, this is a service that relies wholeheartedly on volunteers to deliver meals to the elderly. Volunteers use their own vehicles to deliver meals up to four times a week. This grant meant that Meals On Wheels Mount Gravatt could reimburse volunteers their fuel costs. Those opposite say the Morrison government isn't backing our volunteers enough. I have to thank those opposite for providing an opportunity today to demonstrate that the Morrison government is actually backing our volunteers. The Morrison government is providing record levels of support for this vital sector, and that is seeing volunteer groups go from strength to strength. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all the hardworking volunteers in my electorate of Bonner. 12:16 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide I rise to speak on this motion, and I thank the member for Parramatta for raising this very important issue, because volunteers are the lifeblood of our communities. It would be remiss of me not to mention the changes that have been made by this government. Earlier we heard the member for Bruce talk about the place based volunteer services and the cuts that are taking place and especially how it will affect regional areas, where services will be replaced with some sort of website with the result that people will be unaware of where to find information and won't even be aware that it's up and running. In place of the current funding arrangements, some peak bodies will be given a year of transitional funding. I've seen the effect that this will have on some great organisations in my own electorate, especially in migrant services. Those services, which are volunteer based, assist people with interpreters, translations et cetera. The work is all done by volunteers. This will affect them. Another example is the Hutt St Centre in my electorate, which is an incredible organisation that does great work for homeless people, trying to help them transition out of homelessness into a stable residence with the services that go with that. The Hutt St Centre has just had its grants chopped by the state government. They are one of the volunteer groups in my electorate that do an enormous amount of work, and there'll be a big gap in the Adelaide CBD without that funding for the Hutt St Centre. We recently visited the centre with Jason Clare, who is the shadow minister for housing, to see the great work they do. It's such a pity that the state Marshall Liberal government has decided to chop their funding because that will in turn affect their volunteers and all the good work that's being done there. As I've said, I've got some great volunteer groups in my electorate. The SANFL is the South Australian football association for Aussie Rules football—the highest division in the state. I was on the board of the West Adelaide Football Club for a number of years. You see the volunteers that come in day in day out, assisting with coaching, helping to run the canteen, and taking guernseys home to wash them. It is great work, and you see it everywhere. Another great organisation in my electorate is the Adelaide Day Centre for Homeless Persons which has been set up to assist people in some of the most dire straits. The centre assists people who are living on the streets to transition and come back to some sort of normality. It is run by a magnificent woman, Sister Janet Mead of the Sisters of Mercy. Many of you who are my age may remember Sister Janet Mead. She had a hit song with the Lord's Prayer in the seventies, which went to No. 1 and remained in the top 40 for years. This woman does incredible work. She is our own Mother Theresa in South Australia. They go around and pick people up who are sleeping in parks and doing it rough. They feed them and get them into shelter, and then transition them into some form of housing. I'd just like to give a shout out to Sister Janet Mead and all the other sisters at the Adelaide Day Centre for Homeless Persons. They do great, great work. Then we come back to sport. We see sporting clubs in every suburb, from soccer to football. There's the Kilburn Football and Cricket Club—a great club that's run by the president, Dale Agius. They have everything from under-10 boys' teams to girls' teams. It's a fantastic community club that also assists some of the kids in the area who, if they didn't have their football teams and the support by Dale and the other members of the committee, perhaps may not have the opportunity to be where they are today. They also have a really good relationship with the Ghan Kilburn City Soccer Club, which uses the premises. Basically, they look after kids under 18 who have come here on their own as refugees. They gather them up every week and have a fantastic competition where they feel like they're part of the community. This is all done by volunteers: people who are working their guts out, day in day out, for no return but just to give back to the community. I think we have to remind ourselves constantly what it would cost government if we took volunteers out of the community. So big praise to all our volunteers and volunteer groups. 12:21 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I rise today to speak on the motion moved by the member for Parramatta, and to congratulate our hardworking volunteers across Australia. I thank them for their outstanding efforts, particularly in the last 12 months. Six million Australian volunteers contribute 600 million volunteer hours each and every year. That's an amazing statistic, and something that we should all feel proud of as Australians. I know that people in this room have volunteered and that people across my electorate of Higgins have volunteered. Australians love to volunteer. The pandemic has placed significant strain on volunteers across Australia and, indeed, right across the world. We know that, because COVID has created a particular situation. But volunteers have pivoted to do things differently. I really congratulate my hardworking constituents and volunteers in Higgins for the work they have done to pivot during COVID-19. As we know, volunteers are the lifeblood of our local communities. We're lucky in Higgins to have a cavalcade of hardworking, dedicated and generous volunteers providing countless hours of support to our community. Last week, it's worth noting, was National Volunteer Week, Australia's largest week celebrating volunteers. This year's theme is 'Recognise. Reconnect. Reimagine'. How appropriate, after the COVID-19 pandemic, which we know is still ongoing—particularly in my home state of Victoria. This year's theme is about recognising the hard work of our volunteers; reconnecting, which has been so difficult during COVID; and reimagining because, of course, we've had to pivot during COVID. So it's befitting that I recognise a number of individuals in my electorate and the fact that they and the organisations they participate in have received significant support from the volunteer grants that our federal government—the Morrison government—has been distributing to each and every electorate right across Australia. That's $10 million each and every year, and this year it has increased to $20 million—so it has been doubled. I know that the volunteer organisations in my electorate of Higgins are very grateful for this contribution from the Morrison government—indeed, from the taxpayers of Australia. The first one I'd like to talk about from my electorate is the Ashburton United Soccer Club, which I visited last year before the lockdown. Barry Poulsen has been a volunteer at the club for over 35 years and is a life member. He has been an incredible contributor to the Ashburton soccer club. His extensive involvement has been particularly through championing women's involvement and by promoting inclusiveness. It's fantastic to see that he has been recognised for the wonderful values he holds and the support that he gives to his club. The Ashburton club received a volunteer grant which enabled it to buy new computers and IT equipment, something that many sporting clubs need now that they're becoming digitalised. It makes it easier to keep track of what they do, and they're very pleased with that grant. Another organisation is JoCare, based in Malvern. Kerri Anne Brussen is the coordinator for JoCare. Her army of volunteers is another great example of an organisation that pivoted. Kerri Anne teamed up with my office to make sure that the volunteers in her organisation could get out and support the vulnerable through printing of the services that they could provide to help with outreach to the socially isolated and those experiencing loneliness to provide them connections back to the community. Particularly through lockdown in Victoria, these were sorely needed services that were incredibly appreciated by those in my electorate. Lastly, I want to mention a very long-serving volunteer, Mrs Patricia Lorraine Bridger, who has just celebrated her 100th birthday in Samarinda aged care in Ashburton. It was a delight to join Patricia, her family and friends for this very special occasion to celebrate her 100th birthday. It's one of my most favourite things I do as a member in parliament. I was able to provide a letter from the Queen, a letter from the Prime Minister and a birthday card from myself. She was born in 1921 on 14 April, and what was really beautiful is that she was wearing a pearl necklace given to her by her daughter which has 42 pearls—a pearl for every child, grandchild, great-grandchild and now great-great-grandchild; 42 pearls of joy around her neck. The celebrations exemplified her wonderful, long and happy life. I asked her the secret to her wonderful life and she said, 'A happy family.' Pat has lived an extraordinary life of selflessness. She's been involved in school committees and community fundraising. She has been a member of the East Malvern RSL for over 35 years. Congratulations, Patricia, and I look forward to your 101st birthday. 12:26 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I'm very pleased to speak on this motion before the Chamber today, moved by my colleague and friend the member for Parramatta. It is important indeed that we take an opportunity to stop, pause and reflect on the extraordinary contribution of volunteers in our nation and in each of our communities. I know that each member speaking wishes to do that. I certainly have a tradition in Newcastle where I hold an annual event to recognise the extraordinary contribution of volunteers in the federal electorate of Newcastle. I have been doing that since I was first elected in 2013, and I have awarded almost 270 individuals and at least 17 community based groups and organisations with recognition. It is unimaginable. Our community would be a very, very different kind of place without volunteers who are working in our surf clubs, our sporting associations, our historical societies, our school P&Cs and our cultural institutions like community based cinemas. Our community service organisations ensure there is adequate food for people in our communities and reach out to those suffering mental ill-health. It always blows me away how each one of those volunteers is incredibly humble, does not expect to receive recognition and always thinks they're not deserving of recognition, yet thousands of other Novocastrians clearly disagree when they're nominating them to receive these awards each and every year. There's another very important part of this motion which I want to bring to the attention of the Chamber. We don't get to just stand up here and pat ourselves on the back, congratulating our volunteer organisations. I have listened very carefully to the government contributions, and there has been little mention of the fact that our volunteer resource centres now—in regions like yours and mine; certainly in Newcastle—are being starved of funds. They are being literally starved of funds. We recognise that the volunteer organisations have increased need now because of the global pandemic, and the stress on volunteer organisations has been immense throughout COVID-19. But organisations that help make sure that our community has the volunteering capacity that is required, organisations like the Hunter Volunteer Centre, are about to lose their funding altogether. So let's not pat ourselves on the back, members of this government. This is not a time for hubris or self-congratulations. The Hunter Volunteer Centre has been assisting volunteers in my region for more than 45 years now. They have an extraordinary track record of assistance. More recently, in the past 20 years, they have directly assisted over 26,000 people to find volunteering opportunities in our community. They reach out to organisations to build their capacity to attract, sustain and maintain their volunteering base. It's incredibly important work. What we learnt from the recent COVID restrictions is that people are willing to socially distance. They are willing to do what is necessary. But there is a very strong desire to reconnect now in our communities, for our regions to come together. So for the Hunter Volunteer Centre the decision of this government to effectively take away funding from regional centres, like the Hunter, and allocate it just to big state peak bodies is devastating news. It is effectively assigning local volunteer resource centres to the history books—not good enough. Members opposite should be lobbying their minister, as I am, to overturn this decision, to back our local resource centres— (Time expired) 12:31 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde It's with great pleasure that I rise to speak on this motion on volunteers. Winston Churchill famously said, 'We make a living by what we get. We make a life by what we give.' I, along with my colleagues on this side of the chamber—and I've got no doubt those on the other side of the chamber—value the role and contribution that volunteers make to our communities right across this country. If I look at that, in part that is reflected in the nearly $10 million of volunteer grants that this government issues every year to assist volunteers and encourage volunteering. I'm very pleased that nearly $60,000 in volunteer and stronger community grants were allocated to my electorate in the 2019-20 and 2020-21 years for volunteer activities, including for organisations such as the Beenleigh Girls' Brigade, Chambers Flat Rural Fire Brigade, Coomera Valley Rural Fire Brigade, Girl Guides Queensland, Logan House Fire Support Network, Rosies youth mission, Shailer Park Meals On Wheels, St Vincent de Paul, Beenleigh BMX Club, Soroptimist International of Beenleigh and Beenleigh Quilters' Association. That is a reasonably long list but it does not in any way reflect the full list of the wonderful volunteer organisations across the electorate of Forde. More broadly, the Australian government will deliver up to $40.1 million over five years for the new volunteer MA model to volunteering peak bodies. We're also providing a one-off investment of some $3.4 million to Volunteering Australia to develop and improve volunteer management and IT infrastructure. With many of the volunteer organisations that I deal with I know it is those skills in IT management and managing the volunteer base of those organisations that systems like this are greatly going to improve the efficiency of. This is important because the volunteering sector is still struggling with the impact of COVID-19. Volunteering Australia's research shows that nearly three quarters of volunteer programs have not come back, or are not coming back—even as COVID restrictions are lifting. Out of the 600 respondents over half said their organisations needed more volunteers and four out of 10 are finding it difficult to re-engage or recruit previous volunteers or new ones. These, I think, are concerning numbers because the numbers of volunteers had already been declining in the lead-up to COVID-19. Being busy limits the free time that we have available to give to others. From 2010 to 2019 there was a seven per cent decline in the number of volunteers. The six million volunteers who volunteered in 2019 contributed nearly 600 million hours to our communities right across this country, yet, disappointingly, that's still a 20 per cent decrease from 2014. With COVID, we've seen a long period of social distancing and isolation. Volunteering has been a terrific way for many to reconnect in our communities. But I know from speaking to those at our Meals on Wheels organisations, who do such a tremendous job, that they have struggled with volunteers, as have their clients. Normally their volunteers can go in and have a cup of tea and a bit of a chat, which breaks that loneliness and provides some company and discussion to those who might be home alone. It has been very difficult for them during COVID because they haven't been able to do that. They've had to knock on the door and leave the meal at the door and they've not been able to engage. Both the volunteers who are delivering the meals and also the people who are isolated in their homes have found that incredibly difficult. The Volunteering Queensland website lists over 224 volunteering opportunities within 15 kilometre of Beenleigh. The Salvos in Beenleigh are looking for retail assistance. The Story Dogs volunteer team at Upper Coomera are looking for people to take their dogs into a local school every week to help children learn to read. Lives Lived Well need volunteers for Logan House and the Logan Family Recovery teams. The Logan Area Committee on the Ageing are looking for people to be part of their community visitor scheme. I want to thank everybody in our community who are involved in volunteering. They make our community a richer and more vibrant place in which to live. I want to commend their efforts and wish them every success with their efforts in the future. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Rotary Australia and New Zealand 127 12:37 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon I move: That this House: (1) acknowledges that Rotary Australia and New Zealand celebrates its centenary anniversary and first 100 years of service in 2021; (2) recognises over 100 years, the strong trust, confidence and worldwide recognition developed through the actions of Rotarians in support of communities; (3) notes: (a) Rotary's important work partnering the Global Polio Eradication Initiative and its involvement in the End Trachoma project; and (b) there are approximately 30,000 members who belong to one of the 1,052 charter Rotary clubs established throughout Australia; and (4) congratulates Rotary on its participation in global initiatives that have fostered peace, changed the world, helped communities and families, and fundamentally made a measurable difference to the unique lives of millions. Australia is a nation of givers. We are a generous people. We look after our mates, we support those in need and we certainly are a nation of volunteers. In fact, it's estimated that there are more than seven million active volunteers right across our great nation—ordinary people regularly giving up their time to achieve extraordinary things. Of all the volunteers across Australia, 30,000 belong to a local Rotary club. This year, 2021, marks 100 years of Rotary in Australia and New Zealand. That's 100 years of Rotary volunteers doing great work within their local communities right across the nation. A wonderful demonstration of the organisation's long-term impact is the project to eradicate polio. Thirty-five years ago, Rotary became a founding partner of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative. Through this initiative, nearly three billion children in 122 countries have been protected against this paralysing disease. Over the last 100 years the international efforts of Rotary in Australia have been truly remarkable. But equally important is the 100 years of support that Rotarians have provided to their local communities. Today I want to focus on the great work that's being done in Rotary district 9830. This district covers the entire state of Tasmania, my home state, and I'm proud of it. There are around 50 Rotary clubs spread right across the state, with more than 1,200 members busily working away. Day in, day out, they make such a lasting difference. During this time of uncertainty, the work that they do—the work that's being undertaken by Rotary clubs right of cross the state—is particularly important. Many clubs, quite rightly, are focusing on programs that support wellbeing in our communities, and there's no doubt that there's a significant need and requirement when it comes to wellbeing. Many are struggling with the uncertainty of COVID and the issues that that pandemic has brought, and to that end the program called Boots on the Ground aims to address this need. This is a partnership between Rotary Tasmania Community Care, Tasmanian Women in Agriculture and Rural Alive & Well. The focus is on raising awareness of mental health and on practical, on-the-ground support for rural Tasmanians to improve their wellbeing. Under the program, 400 people from right across the state recently attended the 'Are you bogged mate?' workshop. This program focuses on mental health and suicide prevention within the farming community and helps to break down the stigma for asking for help. Another program that is underway is the Grumpy Goat Co Care Farm project. This project uses animals and farming practices to assist young people in overcoming mental, social and physical challenges. The pilot program will initially be based in Smithton in my home electorate of Braddon. Partnering with the University of Tasmania, they will be collecting data to determine the effectiveness and the outcomes of treatments. If successful, this is planned to be rolled out right across the rest of the state. One of the impressive aspects of Rotary is their commitment to partnering with other organisations at all levels of government right across the state. A great example of this in northern Tasmania is the mobile health buses. These two buses were donated by the Tasmanian government and transformed thanks to a $100,000 federal grant and additional money raised by Rotary Tasmania. The buses are now in the very capable hands of the Royal Flying Doctor Service, with the emphasis on increasing youth mental health support in the bush. These buses are focusing on preventive mental health screening, telehealth services, counselling, nutrition and health education. So thanks to all Rotarians. Thanks for the work that you've done and you'll continue to do to make our state a better place. Kick up your heels and celebrate this wonderful achievement, this 100-year milestone. I wish you well for the year ahead. Finally, I wish to give a big shout-out to the members of the Wynyard Rotary Club. Wynyard Rotary Club will celebrate their 50th anniversary on 18 June. I know everyone in this place will certainly join me and wish them a wonderful celebration and a wonderful Saturday night. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP Is the motion seconded? Mr van Manen 188315 I second the motion. 12:42 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie I don't think there are many members of parliament who can cite Rotary as one of the fundamental reasons why they've ended up in this place, but I can, and so I'm thrilled to be able to speak on the 100-year anniversary of Rotary. Rotary is not just something I admire as a local MP who recognises its work as benefiting my own community as well as people around the world through programs like polio eradication or cleft palate correction through Interplast. Rotary was what pushed me fast down a path of seeing that individuals can change many things in the world and that groups of individuals can make an even bigger difference. I first got involved with Rotary as a 14-year-old when Strathfield Rotary hosted debating competitions between local public high schools. This was the 1970s. I learnt a lot as a representative of Strathfield Girls High School and I also got to see my dad's involvement as a Rotarian, including as president, treasurer—the fate of every accountant in Rotary!—and district treasurer. I helped establish an Interact club and later a Rotaract club. Then Rotary decided that I should go to RYLA, the Rotary Youth Leadership Awards camp, one of those pivotal experiences. It was my first visit to Springwood, which is now my own electorate, at Blue Gum Lodge. I still remember the people I met and the different perspectives I got on leadership. Then I was a Rotary exchange student, one of Rotary's most challenging but transformational programs. It's one of the reasons I'm here today. Rotary sent me to Mexico. This was 1981. Now, I didn't know what I was getting into, nor did the other Aussies heading across with me, and there would have been about 10 of us. I've kept in touch with many of them, and to a person we know that the year living with generous Mexican families, making friends at school, travelling across the country and learning Spanish completely changed us—changed us profoundly. I shared the experience with people like former journalist Virginia Haussegger AM; technology entrepreneur and inventor Dr Steven Frisken, who won the 2018 Prime Minister's Prize for Innovation; TAFE policy expert James Worner; and education researcher Dr Alison Reedy. I am clearly the underachiever of the group! No doubt they would all have achieved great things no matter what, but the gift Rotary gave us was immeasurable, as it was for Elloyse Saw, now doing her PhD, around carers of people with mental illness, in Newcastle. Her year in Brazil, more than a decade ago, shaped her life, and it was thanks to Springwood Rotary club, of which my father is still a member and I'm now an honorary member. My parents were very proud to host Rotary exchange students from South Africa and Brazil, and I've been proud to host students from Brazil and Germany. All those students, now adults with their own careers, say that the Australian experience with Rotary was life-changing. That's why we really need to mark this hundred years. It isn't just the sausage sizzles that they do in our community—although is there a weekend without a Rotary sausage sizzle? The last year has been tough without them. I want to give a shout-out to all the Hawkesbury and Blue Mountains clubs, who've celebrated the hundred years in their own ways. But the big red Rotary bus—a Fantastic Aussie Tours bus decked out in Rotary signage and supported by the Rotary E-Club of Greater Sydney, of which some of my locals are members—was a common theme throughout my electorate. Each club is different but they're all making a difference: Central Blue Mountains Rotary, where I see a strong focus on mental health, especially around bushfires; Upper Blue Mountains Sunrise Rotary, raising money for so many local causes, including homelessness; Rotary Lower Blue Mountains, who have run the local Glenbrook markets for nearly two decades, an enormous effort on their part; Rotary Club of Katoomba, who continue to strongly support youth exchange; Rotary Club of Springwood and their Music Amongst the Autumn Leaves, which brings together mountains schools' talented musicians; and Rotary Club of Blackheath, with members working on bushfire recovery, in particular following the last terrible bushfires. And then there are the Hawkesbury clubs: Richmond, with their commitment, for years and years, at the Hawkesbury show; Windsor, who have ongoing support for disadvantaged students; and Kurrajong North Richmond, with a very strong commitment to the Great Rotary Whitewater Duck Race. That's just a fraction of what these clubs do week in, week out. They're a big part of what makes our community strong. I wish them a happy hundredth and I hope they're going strong for another hundred years. 12:47 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde I'm delighted to rise to speak on this motion by the member for Braddon and to congratulate Rotary Australia and New Zealand on their centenary anniversary and first 100 years of service to our communities. I'd especially like to congratulate my local Rotary clubs: Rotary Club of Beenleigh; Rotary Club of Loganholme; Rotary Club of Logan; Rotary Club of Ormeau-Pimpana, my newest Rotary club; and Rotary Club of Coomera Valley. Rotary's mission is service above self. Whether it's collecting pyjamas for the Fijian flood and cyclone survivors, manning the Bunnings barbecue or packing books to send to children of drought affected families, the service of our local Rotarians makes a real and lasting difference in the lives of countless people in our communities and across the word. More broadly, Rotary is an international community of leaders who are prepared to take on the world's toughest challenges. As the founding partner of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, Rotary have been working to eradicate polio for more than 35 years. Rotary's PolioPlus program was the first initiative to tackle global polio eradication by vaccinating children on a massive scale. Their first program vaccinated children in the Philippines in 1979, and this led to the establishment of the eradication initiative in 1988. At that time there were 350,000 cases of polio in 125 countries. Since then, Rotary and their partners have helped immunise more than 2.5 billion children against polio in 122 countries across the globe. Focusing on advocacy, fundraising, volunteer recruitment and awareness building, Rotary's polio eradication program is one of the world's longest-standing and most significant. More than one million Rotary members have been a part of this program, and they have contributed more than $2.1 billion. But more valuable than that are the countless volunteer hours to protect the more than 2.5 billion children across the globe that have been helped. The infrastructure Rotary built to end polio is also being used to treat and prevent other diseases, including COVID-19. In fact, Rotary in India are lending the knowledge they gained from the mass polio vaccination to the COVID vaccination program in that country. We know how important that is at present. The polio program has wider benefits beyond just vaccination. The polio surveillance networks and vaccination campaigns monitor children for other health problems like vitamin deficiencies and measles so they can also be addressed early. The global efforts to eradicate polio have saved some $27 billion in healthcare costs since 1988 and are expected to save a further $14 billion by 2050. If all these efforts to remove polio stopped today, within 10 years polio could paralyse as many as 200,000 children each year. The global healthcare costs would rise dramatically. It just shows the value and importance of the work that Rotary has done over these past many years. I had the pleasure earlier this year of attending the 100th anniversary lunch celebration that was held by the combined clubs of Beenleigh, Loganholme and Logan. I reflect on the work that they have contributed to our community over so many years. We speak about the polio program. We also know about the exchange programs they have and the Pride of Workmanship Awards that they hold each year. Now they are looking to reprise the Beenleigh Cane Festival, which for many years has been in abeyance. It's this contribution to our local communities by these three clubs—and I also wish to mention the Rotary Club of Coomera Valley and the Rotary Club of Ormeau-Pimpama—that makes our communities such a wonderful place in which to live. I want to commend Rotary right across my electorate—the clubs of Beenleigh, Logan, Loganholme, Ormeau and Coomera Valley. I commend Rotary for the tremendous work that they do not only in my community but across the world, and I congratulate Rotary for their hundred years of serving our communities. 12:52 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley Rotary in Australia and New Zealand celebrates 100 years of service this year. In 1921, four Rotary clubs were created in Melbourne, Auckland, Wellington and Sydney, and from there, Rotary clubs have been established right across Australia. Today communities all over our country benefit from the hard work and services of local Rotary clubs, including in my electorate of Oxley. I'd like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Rotary clubs in my community who do so much work on both local and international causes. Thank you to the Rotary clubs of Greater Springfield, Brisbane Centenary, Forest Lake, Goodna, Jindalee and Sumner Park. In April I had the honour of joining many of these local Rotary clubs at the very special unveiling of the Lorikeet Park Peace Pole. Rotary has been instrumental in celebrating and promoting peace and unity through its international Peace Pole Project. This great project, which began in Japan in 1955, has placed 200,000 of these internationally recognised symbols of peace on earth in 200 countries around the world, including at the Egyptian pyramids in Giza, in Hiroshima and even at the North Pole. This year, Rotary aims to distribute 100 peace poles across Australia in celebration of 100 years of Rotary, spreading the universal peace message, 'May peace prevail on earth.' This message is written on the pole in four languages, highlighting that, although we may speak different languages, we are one. As the federal member for Oxley, I'm proud to represent one of the most culturally diverse electorates in the country. Our unity through diversity has always been, and will always be, what makes Australia strong. Initiatives like the peace pole are opportunities for us to share and celebrate all the things that make us unique and bring us together. Strengthening our unity and diversity should always be a priority. This is what helps to build a more understanding, welcoming and peaceful world. In service of this goal, Rotary works to provide clean water, sanitation and hygiene to communities across the globe to fight disease and improve access to low-cost and free health care. They are focused on supporting education, protecting the environment, growing local economies and reducing malnutrition. Not only do they promote these important causes across the globe but Rotary clubs like the ones in my electorate bring these issues to the attention of the Australian community. They make the fight for peace and a better world accessible and meaningful to every single Australian. Time, energy and passion to improve our world are all you need to get involved with your Rotary club and contribute to important causes locally and around the world. Through Rotary's Interact club program, young people are introduced to these important issues. They're empowered to make changes in their school community and to contribute meaningfully to the world around them. I know that my local community is richer for the work that our Rotary and Interact clubs do. The Rotary Club of Greater Springfield, for example, hosts a trash and treasure market every month to raise funds for their work in the community and to promote reuse and recycling of items that would otherwise end up in a dump. The Rotary Club of Brisbane Centenary recently shipped vital donations to Timor-Leste, and the Jindalee club organises volunteers to remove graffiti from their local community. The Rotary Club of Sumner Park organises volunteers to clean up local parks on the second Sunday of each month and the Forest Lake Interact club run a fun-run as a fundraiser, raising $1,187 for the Wounded Warrior Project. This is not an exhaustive list of what these clubs have done for my community. There simply isn't enough time to go through all of their activities. The Oxley electorate is incredibly privileged to have these clubs serving us locally, and I know that communities all over the world have benefited from their service as well. Thank you to these local Rotary clubs and to all Rotary clubs across Australia for your service over the past 100 years. I look forward to seeing the impact you will have on our local communities, our country and the globe into the future. 12:56 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's wonderful to be able to speak on this motion celebrating the centenary of Rotary Australia and New Zealand. Like many members in this place, I have family members who have been participants in Rotary in the past, who are participants in the present and who, no doubt, will be in the future because it's a fine community organisation, and that's because it embodies the values that fundamentally underpin the strength of our country. The success of our country does not come from Canberra down; it comes from responsible citizens forming community organisations as a foundation for this nation's success. Rotary, over 100 years, has done incredible work in Australia and internationally. In particular, they're a group of citizens that have taken responsibility for their local community. There is almost no community across the country that you can walk past without seeing a footpath, a seat in a park or a children's playground where Rotary has had its footprint and raised money locally from other citizens to be able to provide the best facilities for their local community. In Goldstein, we have many important local Rotary clubs that provide an excellent service to our local community. At the Sandringham Rotary club, I'd like to recognise the efforts of the current board members in this year: President John Dennison, President-elect Ian Glover, Vice President Ian Wells, Secretary Jackie Wells and Treasurer Alan Brebner. At the Beaumaris Rotary club, thank you to the executive: President Adrian Culshaw, President-elect Lynda Doutch, Secretary Roy Seager and Treasurer James Glenwright. At the Rotary Club of Glen Eira, thank you to the executive: President Lili Teichman, President-elect Roberto Ortiz, Secretary Joan Luscak and Treasurer Geoffrey Asher. At the Hampton Rotary club, thank you to the executive: President Amanda Hill. President-elect Maria Sierra, Treasurer Rosalind Bodley and Secretary Elizabeth Ware. At the Bentleigh Moorabbin Central Rotary club, thank you to the executive: President Geoff Gledhill, President-elect Helen Nodrum, Vice President Larry Green, Treasurer Alan Kempton and Secretary Neville Kruss. At the Rotary Club of Brighton, thank you to the executive: President Cameron Ward, Vice President Julie Avery, Treasurer David Finney and Secretary Anthony Langley. Finally, at Brighton North Rotary club, thank you to the executive: President Peter Killey, Vice President Brian Cox, Treasurer Neil Graham and Secretary Judy Carruthers. I'd like to pay proper recognition to the role that local Rotary clubs have made in our community and also internationally. Members may not be aware that Ian Riseley OAM who was president of the Sandringham Rotary club went on to become President of Rotary International from 2017 to 2018. Mr Riseley was only the fifth Australian and the third Victorian to be appointed President of Rotary International. He was a member of the Rotary Club of Sandringham from 1978 and was involved in sea scouts and sporting groups, as well as being the honorary auditor and adviser for a number of charitable organisations. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP It being 1 pm, the time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 16:00 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 131 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Chisholm Electorate: Stronger Communities Program 131 16:00 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm I want to talk about the Morrison government continuing to deliver for the people of Chisholm. Recently, I had the pleasure of ensuring that hardworking community oriented organisations received funding under the Stronger Communities grants program. Eleven organisations in Chisholm were awarded funding—organisations like the Monash Men's Shed, which under the experienced hand of its president, Greg Male, does marvellous work in the Monash area and will continue its capacity with this funding. The Blackburn Cycling Club and Mount Waverley Bowling Club were also among the grant recipients. With this money, I know they will contribute enormously to the people of Chisholm. I understand the clubs' presidents, Barry Woods and Barrie Epstein, are thrilled to receive these sorely needed grants. With this funding received under the Morrison government, they can build and develop their organisations, becoming even more effective in strengthening the community around them. I'm immensely pleased to see nearly $150,000 delivered to Chisholm through this program under the guiding hand of the Morrison government. It is fantastic that our government can support the hardworking volunteers of these organisations. It is important to see how they help people in Chisholm to get involved. This is exactly what I want to do: bring people together. Mouse Plague 131 16:02 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin This morning in the House, I tried to move a suspension of standing orders so that the government could talk about the mouse plague across four Australian states. What we're hearing from farmers, particularly in New South Wales, is that not enough is being done by this government when it comes to the mouse plague. Indeed, the federal government have gone missing. In estimates last week, when they were asked about what they're doing about this mouse plague, the federal government said, 'We're not doing anything; it's all up to the states.' That's what they said. It is outrageous that this government doesn't accept responsibility and will not help the farmers across Australia dealing with this mouse plague. What we're seeing with this mouse plague is thousands and thousands of mice all across New South Wales but also in Queensland, in Victoria and in South Australia. It's estimated to be doing a billion dollars worth of damage, and this government says, 'It's not our responsibility; we are not doing anything.' They don't care about the mouse plague. They don't care about the farmers who are trying to deal with it. It's completely outrageous that this government continues to sit and say, 'Not our responsibility; it's all up to the states.' Even the agriculture minister in New South Wales, a National Party member, is disappointed that the government is not doing anything about this mouse plague—absolutely nothing. The APVMA still have not approved emergency listing for the chemical to deal with the mouse plague. The government needs to act and it needs to do more. South Korea 131 16:03 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid 2021 marks 60 years of Australia-Korea diplomatic relations. Australia is home to approximately 170,000 Koreans, and our two countries are strong economic, political and strategic partners. I represent an electorate which is home to over 12,000 Australians of Korean ancestry and know firsthand the benefits that Korean Australians provide to our country. Our two countries are fortunate to have great people-to-people links through many dedicated and generous community organisations. The Korean Society of Sydney advocates for friendship, unity and the interests of Korean Australians and is representative of Korean Australian society and government. The Australia-Korea Political and Business Forum is a leading bilateral organisation fostering friendship and understanding between Australian and Korean business communities. The Republic of Korea is Australia's fourth-largest two-way trading partner, and the Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement has strengthened that relationship. We also hold strong defence ties as the only country other than the United States to hold a two-plus-two ministerial meeting with Korea. The Korean values of harmony and respect fit perfectly into the Australian way of life. I enjoy very much working with the Australian Korean community in my electorate of Reid and I look forward to encouraging stronger links between Australia and Korea. Lyons Electorate: Bicentenary Celebrations 132 16:05 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons This year is of special significance to many towns in my electorate. Perth in Tasmania might be a little smaller than WA's, but our terrific town, along with several others throughout the northern Midlands, is celebrating its bicentenary in 2021. Last weekend, Perth kicked things off with a big party at Adams Distillery, which only recently reopened after a devastating fire earlier in the year. I unfortunately couldn't make it—I was here—but it was wonderful to see friends and family join in marking the occasion. On the Monday just gone, Campbell Town marked its bicentenary with a birthday party and commemorative postmark. Now it's the town of Ross, famous for French vanilla slices and scallop pies, that's ramping up celebrations. There'll be a few drinks, a formal ceremony and a public lecture about the historic Ross Bridge, and they'll even unveil the bicentenary quilt they've been working on. Two years of work have gone into that quilt. How's that for dedication, Mr Deputy Speaker? These towns are built tough, and tough people call them home, and that's just the way it is in Tasmania. But these people have hearts of gold. All the towns and regions in our Lyons community have something special to offer, and a bicentenary year really is something. I ask that you all join with me to mark those bicentennial celebrations and pop down to our little slice of paradise on our beautiful island. Lindsay Electorate: Infrastructure 132 16:07 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay Right now, thousands of people are completing Lindsay's biggest survey. Of those people, so many have already told me how important it is for them to see Dunheved Road upgraded. I've got some great news for the thousands of families who use this road every day and the thousands of small businesses who need to move their great Aussie-made products around our community and beyond. Penrith City Council has endorsed the awarding of the tender for the investigation and design of the project. This is the next important step along the way in delivering the upgrade that our community fought so hard to achieve. This week I met with the Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts to discuss this project, because I want to see progress continue to be made as quickly as possible. The Prime Minister knows, the Treasurer knows, the minister for urban infrastructure knows—everyone in the Morrison government knows—how much this project means to people in my community, families and businesses, because I have been pushing from day one, with my community backing me, to secure the full $127 million for the complete upgrade to Dunheved Road. Our community has been there from the start, from that very first signature on my petition, and I truly believe that together we can achieve anything. I'll continue to update the people in my community of Lindsay on this critical upgrade as it gets underway. Housing Affordability 132 16:08 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston Housing affordability for young Australians is at crisis point. The data shows that a person under the age of 25 on a median income is unlikely to be able to either rent or purchase a home on their own in South Australia. A couple aged 25 to 34 on a median income would be likely to be able to purchase a house in Adelaide but would require seven years to save a deposit. In South Australia, we have one of the most affordable states for housing compared to others, and it's still difficult for young Australians to rent or purchase a home. The latest homeownership data reveals that only 10 per cent of Australians under the age of 25 and just over 30 per cent of those aged 25 to 35 own their own home, and it has been getting harder and harder as time has gone on. According to the comparison site Finder, borrowing from the bank of mum and dad accounts for $29 billion annually. They are the nation's ninth-largest mortgage lender and a port of call for almost 4,000 young Australians every month. Because owning a home is so out of reach for young Australians, they are having to turn to their parents. What happens to those young Australians if the bank of mum and dad can't afford to lend to them? They go without. They're not able to do what many other Australians have done. And the response from this government has been: 'Raid your super.' (Time expired) Telecommunications 132 16:10 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey I was very pleased that in the budget the Treasurer awarded another $84.8 million towards the Regional Connectivity Program. The program has already distributed $4½ million in the Grey electorate for some excellent projects, including 4G upgrades and better broadband in certain places. It comes with a long history of the coalition actually being committed to telecommunications in the country. Just the other day I attended the commissioning of the 30th tower built in Grey under the mobile phone black spot program. There are another 19 in the pipeline. I compare this to the previous government. They constructed no mobile phone towers in regional Australia full stop. There was no program. This has been a great program. Of course, we're awaiting eagerly for the announcement of round 5A and then round six to come. Also, yesterday there was an announcement that there will be another review into telecommunications in regional Australia. There was one done two years ago but the circumstances are changing. Under the regional black spot program the telcos are telling us that the model has gone about as far as it can, and so we are now looking for input into what we build for those next steps, because we will keep servicing regional Australia. We will keep building mobile phone towers. Veterans 133 16:11 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon I rise to talk about the treatment of veterans and in particular about the wellbeing centre for Darwin. There was no money in the budget for it. The DVA office in Darwin remains shut. One of the things that we're giving feedback to the federal government on—about the terms of reference to the royal commission—is around the availability, quality and effectiveness of health, wellbeing and support services. Meanwhile, the DVA office is shut and there's no money for the veteran wellbeing centre in the budget. I'm very honoured to have one of my former soldiers with me today here in the chamber. James Duffy served with me in the 3rd battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment. We went to the Malaysia in the early nineties where Duff picked up an ear infection through his service in the mortar—mortars are very loud. If you can imagine a thing exploding that's very loud—it causes permanent hearing loss. After a big battle with DVA—after about five years—Duff received hearing aids. DVA accepted the hearing loss was due to his service, but when it came to replacing the hearing aids they just wanted to give him a basic model instead of excellent hearing aids which, of course, he deserves, having that hearing loss from his service. There are so many things that this royal commission into veterans and defence members needs to address and that is one of them. These people need to be looked after— (Time expired) Sunshine Coast Agricultural Show 133 16:13 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax The show is go. I'm referring of course to the Sunshine Coast Agricultural Show, which is all go this year. From Friday 11 to Sunday 13 June the Sunshine Coast Agricultural Show is back and it will be open. This show, like so many across the country, did not go ahead last year. It too, was a victim of COVID-19. When you're from a regional area in Australia you appreciate the importance of these local shows. Tens of thousands of people will be lining up to get their fix of the Sunny Coast agricultural show in less than two weeks from now. This is about far more than just farmers vying for bragging rights about their produce or animals, or the home chef having the bake-off, or the kids with that fistful of show bags. This is as much about the community. It's about civil society. It's about providing that opportunity for community leaders and everyday residents to again come together, and to do so in an area and for an event that is full of pride. Those showgrounds in Nambour, and that broader district of Nambour, are what it's all about. I'll see you there, Deputy Chair. I'm sure I'll be seeing everybody here at the Sunshine Coast Agricultural Show from 11 to 13 of June. See you then. Oxley Electorate: Hospitals 133 16:14 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley Our community has received some terrific news—that the Queensland Palaszczuk government has announced that it will deliver a new 174-bed public hospital in Springfield to cater for the rapidly growing population in the greater Ipswich region. This is a game changer for our community. The new Mater public hospital at Springfield will include an emergency department, an intensive care unit, maternity services and more procedural areas. Greater Ipswich is one of Australia's fastest growing regions and it has an ever-increasing demand for public health services. The population in the western corridor is projected to grow by 37 per cent by 2031, which is 11 per cent higher than the state population growth. That means an extra 100,000 people will call the Springfield and Ripley Valley region home in the next five years. I'd like to thank the Premier and her government for this important investment in our community and particularly the local state member and assistant minister to the Treasurer, Mrs Charis Mullen. Charis is a tireless advocate for her community, and this investment is just further proof that she gets results for her community in the electorate of Jordan. Importantly, this project is shovel-ready, with Mater expected to be in a position to deliver it by the end of 2024. Finally, it will deliver a major economic boost for the booming region, creating more than 700 jobs during construction and more than 1,000 new frontline health jobs once operational. COVID-19: Vaccination 134 16:16 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I rise today to speak on the national vaccine rollout and the recent increase in doses available to constituents in Barker. The national COVID-19 program is continuing to roll out, and I, like others in this place, am encouraged by the fact there are very many constituents keen to receive the vaccine. The program was boosted in early May, with the Australian government increasing the number of doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine provided weekly to GP clinics for those over the age of 50. GP clinics previously receiving 50 doses are week are now receiving 150 doses a week and those previously receiving 100 doses are now receiving 200 doses per week. While I understand there is some community concern about the rollout and the vaccine's availability, 34 GP clinics and respiratory clinics across Barker are rolling out a supply of more than 9,400 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine each and every week, while vaccination hubs in Mount Gambier, Bordertown, Berri, Kingston, Lameroo, Murray Bridge, Naracoorte, Penola, Pinnaroo and Millicent are rolling out the Pfizer vaccine to the cohort between 16 and 49. To anyone that's received the vaccine, I say thank you. But to those that are patiently waiting for this vaccine I also say thank you, because you know that this is the largest peacetime undertaking our nation has ever embarked upon. COVID-19: Nepal 134 16:17 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I rise to give voice to the Nepalese community in my electorate. In recent months we have watched in horror at the unfolding COVID-19 crisis in India, but this virus is running rampant across the subcontinent and Nepal is now facing a similar crisis. It is reported Nepal has recorded some half a million cases and some 6,000 deaths, but experts believe these numbers are significantly underrepresented in terms of the total infection and death toll. I have great admiration for the Nepalese community in Western Sydney, many of whom I consider close friends, including Goba Katuwal, Ramesh Pandey, Binod Shrestha, Ganesha KC and Indra Ban. In fact, I intended to visit Nepal in March last year, but the pandemic made it impossible at the very last minute. The Australian Nepalese community is calling for the federal government to do all it can to support our friends to the north. These are sentiments I echo. If Australia is to be an active citizen in our region, we need to take decisive steps to reduce the risk of COVID-19, particularly in countries where outbreaks can have such devastating impacts. To my Nepalese friends I say: I stand with you. It's time this federal government did too. It has announced support and now it needs to get on with delivering it and work with the Nepalese ambassador to get humanitarian and medical aid to the people who need it most. The time for symbolic gestures is over. Nepal needs our help, and we must deliver it. Braddon Electorate: Men's Shed 134 16:19 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon Every man needs a shed. In fact, every shed probably needs a man. Who knows? But our local men's sheds are becoming essential meeting places for blokes in our community right across the north-west, the west coast and King Island in the electorate of Braddon. So it's only right to say that the Morrison government continues to back them in. Congratulations to the Mount Black Men's Shed in Rosebery on their successful application for funding under the National Shed Development Program. I received a letter only the other day from Kevin Dogrusever, the president of the shed. Kevin told me that the members were delighted to hear the great news that their application had been successful. One of their first jobs on the list is to fix the leaky roof and then to build a dividing wall to separate the workshop from the meeting room. This will make the shed a lot more welcoming, and safer and easier for meetings to take place. Kevin went on to say the Mount Black Men's Shed is relatively new, but it's already serving the Rosebery and Tullah regions and communities well. He can see real improvement in the way that members relate to each other, and there's real community spirit coming from within the shed. At the end of the day, that's what it's all about. So well done to the Mount Black Men's Shed. COVID-19: Vaccination 134 16:20 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle The vaccine rollout has been a shambles. Despite more than a year to prepare, despite favourable health circumstances that have not put our health system under the kind of pressure experienced in other countries, the Morrison government's vaccine rollout has been a creeping, fumbling, scattergun bunglefest. Not even 10 per cent of aged-care workers have been vaccinated, and less than two per cent of people living in residential disability care have been vaccinated. Across the population as a whole, barely two per cent have been vaccinated. While in America, whose health system has been hammered, they're at 50 per cent already. This failure, this basic administrative incompetence, means more frequent outbreaks and more harmful outbreaks, with impacts on people's physical and mental health and on business and on workers. It's not going to get better as long as the government puts all its energy into bare-faced denial. It's the opposite of responsible government to respond to missing all your targets by simply getting rid of the targets you set in the first place. We need to get Australia vaccinated. It is the key to our recovery. It will make us safer from the serious risk that remains; it will help Australians return home; and it will mean, in due course, that we can open up for people to go to and from Australia. I know there are people with unwell relatives or with newborn children or who are separated from kids through relationship breakdown who desperately want to see one another. But that will not happen while the Morrison government continues, unapologetically, irresponsibly, to make a heartbreaking mess of Australia's vaccine rollout. Surf Life Saving New South Wales: Sydney Branch Awards of Excellence 135 16:22 Mr SHARMA 274506 Wentworth Last Saturday night the Sydney branch of Surf Life Saving New South Wales held their annual 'Branch Awards of Excellence'. These awards recognise outstanding service and exceptional achievement of volunteer lifesavers. I want to congratulate and make special mention of the following award winners from clubs within Wentworth: Trainer of the Year, Michelle Cowans, from Tamarama Surf Club; Support Operations Member of the Year, James McLennan, from Bronte Surf Club; UAV Member of the Year, Brittany Banks, and Master's Athlete of the Year, Scott Thomson, both from North Bondi Surf Club; and Bronte resident Ryan Tindall, who works across the clubs, who was named Duty Officer of the Year. I am especially pleased to acknowledge a number of the younger volunteers who received an esteemed award: Youth Life Saver of the Year, Will Brown, and Junior Lifesaver of the Year (female), Maggie Eisenhauer, both from Bronte Surf Club; Youth Volunteer of the Year, Imogen Barham, from Clovelly Surf Club; Youth Athlete of the Year, Lily Finati, from North Bondi; and Junior Athlete of the Year, Krishna Inder, from Bondi Surf Club. Congratulations also the McDonald Patrol from Bondi Surf Bathers Life Saving Club on being named Patrol Team of the Year. I would also like to thank and congratulate North Bondi president, Andrew Christopher, and Tamarama president, Tim Murray, who recently invited me to their clubs' annual presentation nights. Tamarama's presentation night was significant in being the last event to be held in their old clubhouse, before demolition and rebuild. At the North Bondi presentation, I was delighted to present two of the youth awards to Archie Godby and Isabella Murray. Advent Energy: PEP 11 Licence 135 16:23 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland Does anyone know where the Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia is? He's completely missing in action when it comes to Advent Energy's PEP 11 licence. PEP 11 allows oil and gas exploration drilling off the New South Wales coast from Newcastle to Sydney. Advent Energy has requested a two-year extension of their licence, which will put at risks thousands of local jobs in tourism, hospitality, and recreational and commercial fishing. Their current licence expired on 12 February. At that time the minister for resources, who will make the final decision, said that he would make the decision soon. The minister obviously has a very different understanding of the world 'soon' than most of us, because, almost four months on, we are still waiting for a decision. I have spoken in parliament before about the overwhelming opposition to PEP 11 in my electorate. The community is against it. Labor is against it. Even the New South Wales government is against it. Yet we don't know where the minister stands. It's vital now that this project be killed by the minister, as Advent are getting ready to drill. They are tendering right know for the drilling equipment to start drilling off the coast of places like Redhead Batch. The ball is firmly in the government's court. There's absolutely nothing stopping them from ending this uncertainty, listening to the community's wishes, saving jobs, saving the environment and saying no to PEP-11 once and for all. What is the minister waiting for? World Environment Day 135 16:25 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan I rise today to speak about World Environment Day, which is happening this Saturday. The Ryan electorate is home to a wonderful local environment that I am fighting to preserve and protect. During my tenure as both a local councillor now a Federal MP it has been my great pleasure to get my hands dirty, so to speak, in terms of helping our local environment groups with new plantings, weeding and otherwise to protect and enhance our local environment. We have a number of local environment grounds who are doing tremendous work in the Ryan electorate, and since my election in 2019 I have secured over $54,700 for these environment groups to continue their work. The Moggill Creek Catchment Group have used their funding to undertake weed removal at the Gold Creek Reservoir. The Cubberla Witton Catchments Network has used their funding for the installation of nesting boxes at Green Hill Reservoir and restoration and revegetation at Merri Merri Park. Finally, the Pullen Pullen Catchments Group put their funding towards the rehabilitation of the Pullenvale Forest Park. I'm so proud of the volunteers in the Ryan electorate who are undertaking this and other important work to preserve our local environment. On World Environment Day this Saturday I look forward to visiting the Green Hill Reservoir to see some of this completed work firsthand and I hope you will join me there. Indigenous Australians 136 16:26 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I want to thank all the members and senators who joined the Reconciliation Run this morning, co-organised by Rob de Castella's Indigenous Marathon Foundation and the Parliamentary Friends of Running. It's a reminder that there are many small steps we can take towards reconciliation alongside the big one: an Indigenous voice to parliament. We could fly Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags inside the parliamentary chambers alongside the Australian flag. We could have the Speaker speak the acknowledgement of country in Ngunnawal language when parliament begins. Capital cities could be given dual names as the New Zealanders do. Instead of the Queen's visage, Australian coins could see feature the heads of prominent Indigenous people. The $2 coin does feature the image of Gwoya Tjungurrayi, but he's on the tails side of the coin. Another idea to which I'm quite attracted is put forward by Canberran Anna Howe, who proposes that in the Parliamentary Triangle Mall Road West should be renamed Neville Bonner Place. It would be apt to do so given that next week marks 50 years since Neville Bonner was elected to the parliament. There is an exhibition of the parliamentary art collection acknowledging his work, curated by Rebecca Richards and Lachlan Murray, and I encourage all honourable members to see that collection and to consider Anna Howe's excellent proposal. Economy 136 16:28 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt Today, of course, we had the release of the national accounts, and it's absolutely unbelievable that, just 12 months after the economy in this country had to effectively be brought to a grinding halt in March 2020 with the closure of international borders, the restrictions in all states and territories on the trading of businesses et cetera, the accounts now for the March quarter show that the Australian economy is larger as at March 2021 than it was at the end of March 2020. This is a phenomenal testament to the unbelievable economic management of our government over the last 15 months since the challenge of COVID came upon us from economic and health points of view. The Australian economy is the 12th largest on the planet, at more than US$1.6 trillion, which is unbelievable. Of course, on a per capita basis, we're even more substantial than that: in the top 10. This is before the recent budget measures, which were announced a few weeks ago by the Treasurer, will have their effect, continuing to lead the recovery of our economy post COVID. It's very exciting to see that the naysayers were not correct. Those who were hoping for the economic carnage of the last 12 months to give them a political dividend have not had that rewarded, and it's the coalition government that is safely leading our economy into the future. COVID-19: Victoria 136 16:29 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra Today we have seen the lockdown in Victoria extended by another seven days. Victoria is in lockdown because of this Prime Minister's failure to take responsibility for the two things that were clearly his responsibility: the vaccine rollout and quarantine. This outbreak has come as a result of failures in the hotel quarantine system. It is now eight months ago that Jane Halton handed her review of hotel quarantine to this government. Today she has called on them to get their act together and get this right. Why has it taken eight months? We are seeing people in Victoria in aged care with COVID. After the absolutely devastating crisis last time where we saw so many lives lost in aged care, why is this government not taking this urgently, critically, seriously? Only half of residents in aged care have been vaccinated despite the Prime Minister's promise they would be vaccinated by the end of March. Today, in question time, we asked the Prime Minister: does he take any responsibility for the lockdown in Victoria? He said that lockdowns are a matter for state governments. Obviously, but what about the factors that have contributed to the need for this lockdown and the need for a shutdown to that economy again? Our economy will never get back on its feet until we are vaccinated, and people's health and their lives are at risk— (Time expired) Haemochromatosis 136 16:31 Mr YOUNG 201906 Longman Haemochromatosis is the most common genetic disorder in Australia. In fact, one in 200 people are affected by it. This disorder causes your body to absorb too much iron from your daily diet. Those who have the disorder must visit health professionals on a regular basis to get blood removed in order to drop the iron in their body to safe levels. This treatment is called venesection or phlebotomy and is similar to donating blood. Many people don't realise that they have this disorder or don't realise that too much iron can be a major health problem. Because the symptoms of haemochromatosis, which are tiredness, muscle weakness and joint pain, are generic and non-specific, this disorder often goes undiagnosed. However, iron overload can be dangerous as the human body has a means to control iron levels but cannot excrete excess iron. This can damage and affect the liver, heart and pancreas. I believe that we need to raise more awareness of the health implications of haemochromatosis which is why it's great to hear that, for the first time this year, Haemochromatosis Australia will be painting Australia red by lighting up some of our country's most well-known landmarks and buildings for World Haemochromatosis Week from 1 to 7 June. This includes the Telstra Tower in Canberra today followed by the National Carillion from 3 to 7 June. Haemochromatosis can be detected before damage occurs, and doesn't stop people from going about their lives. I cannot stress too much the importance of seeing a medical professional for a check-up if you believe you may have this disorder. Ballina Women's and Children's Refuge 137 16:32 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond I rise to highlight the urgent need for funding for the Ballina Women's and Children's Refuge. As a former police officer, I have seen firsthand how vital women's refuges are in providing crisis accommodation for women and children fleeing domestic violence. The New South Wales government funding is due to cease on 30 June, and the fact is that, without further funding, this service will be forced to close. The refuge is currently run by a local organisation, Momentum Collective, who took on its operation last year when the charity running it was unable to get enough donations to stay open. Momentum Collective were specifically asked by the New South Wales Department of Communities and Justice to take the refuge over, and they received a one-off funding grant from the department, which will cease at the end of this month. To keep the refuge going, they need guaranteed recurrent funding for staff positions and to provide general upkeep and supplies. Momentum Collective have done an outstanding job running the refuge, advocating for support and arranging a fundraiser event to be held this Thursday. I'd like to recognise and thank those local organisations and businesses for their strong support to keep the doors open. Momentum Collective have stepped up to do their part. The local community and the business community have stepped up too. Now it's time for both the federal and state governments to do their part and urgently provide the desperately needed recurrent funding. The Ballina Women's and Children's Refuge provides such vital crisis accommodation. They must be supported so they can keep operating. Whilst there's wonderful community support, this is primarily a government responsibility, and the government must act urgently. Brand, Mr Damien 137 16:34 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner I rise to speak on the work of an incredible volunteer in my electorate of Bonner. Earlier this week, I had the privilege of meeting Damien, who is the founder of Little Warrior Shields. Damien handmakes amazing medieval inspired play shields and helmets for sick children. These are made from a superlightweight and flexible foam, so they are perfect for children of all ages. In fact, I have a mini version of one of his shields pinned on me today. What started out as a hobby for Damien four years ago has grown into so much more. Damien now has donated over 280 shields to Queensland Children's Hospital and the PA Hospital, all whilst working full time and with a young family. Damien's passion for putting a smile on these children's faces is truly inspiring. He's even using up his annual leave this week to prepare the next batch of shields to donate. What's also extraordinary is how he's also been backed by local businesses in Brisbane. The Hero Studio have sponsored the foam he uses, and East Coast Leather sponsor the leather and screws. Supporting local has never been more important, and this is a prime example of why we must do it. It extends into all parts of our community, making projects just like Little Warrior Shields possible, and now it has touched the lives of hundreds of sick children, making them feel like the little warriors that they are. Corangamite Electorate: Pool 137 16:35 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Today I call on the City of Greater Geelong to hold off on building an outdoor pool in the North Bellarine. It will surely become a white elephant for ratepayers, and there is an alternative: an indoor aquatic facility that meets the needs of everyone. The Geelong council voted to build an outdoor pool on 27 April, but there was little engagement with the community. What I know from the forums and the survey I have given to each household on the Bellarine is that they want an indoor heated pool, with allied health services offering rehab, health and fitness services for the entire community, and where children will learn to swim in a safe and comfortable environment. None of this will be possible with an outdoor pool in the North Bellarine sporting precinct, which is renowned for high winds and, in the Victorian winter, will be freezing and unlikely to be used by the broader community. Delivering an outdoor pool for stage 1 with a plan to retrofit a roof is a bad, expensive plan. We know spending more money upfront saves money in the long run. Take the neighbouring Surf Coast aquatic centre, where the cheaper option, with fewer co-located services, had an annual operating cost of $806,000, while the best option, with gym and group fitness rooms, only cost $433,000 per year. An indoor aquatic facility will take the pressure off neighbouring facilities and fill a need for Newcomb and Ocean Grove. So please jump online and fill out my North Bellarine aquatic survey. (Time expired) COVID-19: Vaccination 138 16:37 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Last Friday, I had my first dose of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine at a GP clinic in Buddina in my electorate of Fisher. I want to thank Kayleigh and Lisa at the clinic for giving me such great care. A few days on, I can report to the House—I know you'll all be very keen to know—I feel great. I'm looking forward to my second shot, and I'm very much looking forward to being fully vaccinated against what is a very deadly disease. The difficult events that are happening right now in Victoria and, in fact, across the world are an important reminder that COVID is not going anywhere and that the risk is still very real for all of us. To the people over the age of 50 in Fisher, I say: register for your vaccine and get the shot right now. Do it now. It could not be easier. I registered early last week, and within a couple of days I had an appointment. If you're under 50 in Fisher, you can still register at www.health.gov.au today, and you will be automatically notified when you do become eligible for your first dose. This could not be more important. We will not be safe in this country until the vast majority of Australians are vaccinated. Our lives and our livelihoods will remain at risk until most of us have had our shots. If you don't want to do it for yourself, do it for your friends or do it for your family. Everybody on the Sunshine Coast will thank you. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Some of us are still scarred by the semi-naked photos of you getting your vaccine shot! Moreton Electorate: Africa Day Festival 138 16:38 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I had the great pleasure of attending Brisbane's Africa Day Festival in Acacia Ridge last weekend, and can I just say upfront how great it is for this festival to be held in Moreton, where it belongs. It's been four years since the last festival, and this event will only get bigger and better. Big congratulations to the Queensland African Communities Council, the peak organisation for African communities in Queensland. It also coincides with Africa Day, acknowledging the formation of the Organisation of African Unity. This festival, held at the Spanish Club, is about showcasing and sharing African culture within the Brisbane community. This year, there were guest performers from interstate and a great combination of traditional and modern dancing and great stalls, not to mention excellent food. Congratulations to the event organisers, to the president of the Queensland African Communities Council, Beny Bol, and to all of the volunteers who I know spent hours and hours making sure everything ran smoothly. As Beny Bol says: This is the only event that brings the African community together every year so it's about celebrating our culture, our arts, our heritage and the talents in our communities. It's about progressing multiculturalism in Queensland. We've been defined by others and now's the time to define ourselves. The most important thing is we need to work together, we need to value each other, we need to be very inclusive. Well said, Beny. I really hope the festival has found a new home in Moreton forever. And could I just add: happy birthday to my dad, Brian Perrett, today. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Happy birthday. Mallee Electorate: Exchange Hotel 138 16:40 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee While in Horsham recently I had the pleasure of visiting the Horsham Exchange Hotel to let the owners, Nick and Mel Murray, know that they had been successful in a federal government grant for $50,300 from the Live Music Australia program. Mel told me that the funding would be put to good use in refurbishing the outdoor performance area so that the pub could go back to live music events. We're all looking forward to that. COVID has hit the entertainment and hospitality industry hard, and I'm thrilled that the Exchange Hotel has benefited from the Live Music Australia program. Round 2 of the program has funded venues in every state and territory, from remote outback pubs to clubs and theatres in major capital cities, assisting them to reopen as restrictions on public gatherings and live music performances are lifted. The funding provides critical support for local live music venues and supports local communities and economies to emerge from the pandemic once more. The Exchange Hotel will be able to once again program music events that will feature local artists. This critical funding will also assist the Exchange Hotel to create safe and inclusive places for artists and audiences. Being one of just a handful of live music venues in the Wimmera region, the Exchange is vital to the local community and is just one example of why arts in regional Australia is so special. I will continue to advocate for it. (Time expired) Hall, Mr Brian Edward 139 16:42 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair Today in Ipswich, at his funeral service, our community paid tribute to Brian Hall. Brian was the best mayor Ipswich never had. My sincere condolences to his wife, Glenda, and family. Brian was a life member of the Australian Labor Party, a life member of the CFMEU and a life member of the National Servicemen's Association. He passed away recently after a short battle with pancreatic cancer. Brian was Ipswich Citizen of the Year in 2015. He gave 20 years of service to the Ipswich ambulance committee. He was a tireless advocate for disability issues based on his experience as a father. He was a regular attender at Trinity Uniting Church, where at every election—state, local and federal—he was the booth captain for the Australian Labor Party. Brian served as president and secretary at Ipswich Trades Hall and Labour Day Committee and marshal at the annual Labor Day march in Ipswich. I learnt to swim because Brian fought for a pool at my local school, at Ipswich East State Primary School. Over the years Brian put up thousands of signs for the Labor Party in Ipswich. He was a mentor, an example and a coach in many ways for Labor and union activists in the Ipswich area. He said when he told me he had pancreatic cancer that he'd lived a good life. He did; a life of service to all of us. His immense legacy and contribution was honoured recently at a dinner where we told him in life what we thought of him and thanked him. We grieve in Ipswich. We give thanks for his life. Vale, comrade. Renewable Energy 139 16:43 Mr JOYCE E5D New England Politics is obviously sprinkled with vexed issues from time to time. They come into your offices, I'm sure you're all well aware, and it works something like this: 'If you vote for this, if you support this, we won't vote for you.' That's subsequently followed by, 'If you don't support this, we won't vote for you.' One of those issues where we see that debate circling around is renewables and the footprint of renewables, especially wind farms. In trying to land a position, I think it's clear to state this: if a community does not have a problem with the renewable footprint, then I do not have a problem beyond saying that I can't support the economics of it. For me, the economics does not stack up. But if it is the view of a community—and in regional areas, we're very much informed by community—that they believe it's something that will assist their local town, then that's their view. I would have to say that this is tearing our communities apart. I can name a town and people who are split down the middle—they are split in favour and against. I don't know about its electricity, but its capacity to generate disharmony in many areas, not all, is apparent without the shadow of a doubt. Macquarie Electorate: A Butterflys Embrace 139 16:45 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie The loss of a baby, either in pregnancy or as an infant is a heartbreaking experience for a family. Naomi Smith went through that experience when she lost Lucas at 18 days. She has set up a charity called A Butterfly's Embrace. The way Naomi describes it, this is about doing the little things that only a bereaved parent notices. A Butterfly's Embrace has designed a new garden that will be built within the Secret Garden and Nursery in Richmond so that parents, siblings, families and friends can remember their lost child. I was very pleased to be at the unveiling of the design of this garden. It's a heart within a heart, surrounded by white flowers to symbolise purity and peace. Her plan is that people will design a pebble and place that pebble within the garden in memory of their child. It will be a place to go, either to take time out from the noise of the world or just to visit in honour of a lost baby—babies who have gone way too soon. I want to congratulate Naomi and her group—her gang of girlfriends, really—who were there with her at the fundraiser to launch this garden design. She has great support from family and friends. I really look forward to seeing this garden within a garden come to fruition. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 In accordance with a resolution of the House on 13 May 2021, the time for members' statements has concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 139 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Mental Health 139 16:46 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie I move: That this House: (1) notes with dismay that suicide is the leading cause of death among Australians aged 15 to 24 years; (2) recognises that young people's decision to access mental health care is fragile, and if they do not have a positive experience they may not make another attempt to seek help; (3) further notes that youth-friendly mental health services are not available uniformly to young people; and (4) calls on the Government to: (a) increase access to effective mental health services and supports for young people across all stages of mental ill-health; and (b) build a youth mental health workforce to meet the current and future needs. I have been compelled to move this motion as a desperate plea to the Morrison government to provide a headspace for the Hawkesbury. We've needed one for years. I committed to one at the last election and we've seen the benefit of the bipartisan commitment to one in Katoomba, even though that's just a smaller, satellite headspace. It has made a real difference. But I have been urging since 2013 that the Hawkesbury needs its own dedicated space for young people to seek help with their mental health. The Hawkesbury has seen a number of recent tragic suicides by young men and boys. These highlight the really desperate need for there to be ready access to mental health services at an early stage, and then able to support people as they have their journey, hopefully, to good mental health. One of the things I've done is to issue a petition inviting people to share their comments and views about why they think we need a headspace in the Hawkesbury. I want to share some of the comments from those people—already, hundreds of people have signed the petition and given their reasons why. These are some of the things that people say, and I want to start with comments made by people who are practitioners in this area. I'll start with a comment from the manager of the headspace in Katoomba, who is very much encouraging and supporting the establishment of one in the Hawkesbury. They said: 'Katoomba headspace has been blown away by the demand that it's faced, and that's not a good thing. We always knew there was an unreported demand in the Blue Mountains, but it has come through and the same is going to happen in the Hawkesbury, where I'm confident that we will get a headspace.' Really, this motion is saying to the government: 'Please do it because it's the right thing to do. Please don't make this about politics. Please do this now, when it is so urgently needed.' Here is an example of the sorts of comments that educators give me. I will just call this person Kristin. She's an educator and she deals on a daily basis with families in distress with no local support services to turn to when they have children experiencing a range of mental health issues. She says: 'Waiting lists for psychologists are months long. The impact on both children and parents is dramatic and long term. The increase in mental health issues over the past two years is phenomenal, and our community is in desperate need of immediate help.' You might wonder why that is so in the past two years. Obviously, drought affected many parts of the Hawkesbury. We had bushfires beyond the scale that anyone has seen. We then had flood, then COVID, and then a second flood—the largest we've had in 30 years. These are some of the reasons why people are really at the end of their tether. Another person who signed the petition said: 'My wife works in mental health for Nepean and Blue Mountains and said this is really, really needed. You've got to listen to the people at the coalface.' Another said: 'I work at Hawkesbury hospital and agree. We really need a headspace in the area.' A chaplain from a local high school said: 'I work at a high school as a chaplain and do various other youth work. This is a necessity for the area.' Another person commented: 'As someone who has worked with young people for over 15 years, I'm well aware of the difficulties the current generation is facing. I work with adolescents in the Hawkesbury and see their struggles on a daily basis, particularly over the last 18 months. It's absolutely vital that this community receives support and that intervention is put in place to assist in making a positive difference for our children in the Hawkesbury. It is absolutely long overdue and a necessity for current and future generations.' I have comments from psychologists and from people involved in the consumer side of the hospital. I have dozens of comments from parents, saying things like, 'I've been looking for something like this for my 16-year-old,'; 'I have a daughter fighting every day to feel normal in a world that feels so strange'; 'My son had PTSD and struggled with depression'; and 'We desperately need a local headspace. The closest one is in Penrith which is so hard to get to.' I'm going to finish with the words of a young woman who says that mental health issues were an issue for her. She says: 'I didn't want to travel 30 minutes to Penrith, but I had no choice. I knew I would be in a fragile state driving home.' We need a headspace in the Hawkesbury now. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is the motion seconded? Mr Neumann HVO I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 16:52 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde I'd like to thank the member for Macquarie for bringing this motion to the House because it gives me the opportunity to talk about the terrific work the government is doing in the youth mental health space. The government recognises that this is a critical issue. We know that the COVID pandemic and recent natural disasters have exacerbated anxiety disorders and mental health problems, sadly. Responding to a headspace survey last year, 74 per cent of young people reported that their mental health was worse since the outbreak of COVID-19 and 34 per cent reported a higher or very high levels of distress, particularly among 15- to 17-year-old men. Seventy-five per cent of mental health issues develop before the age of 25, so we know that investing in the mental health of our young people is fundamentally important. This government has committed a record amount of funding to mental health in the recent budget. We've provided some $278.6 million to expand and enhance headspace youth mental health services. Headspace is the government's flagship program for the provision of services for young people aged 12 to 25 experiencing, or at risk of, mental illness. It was my pleasure to visit headspace at Upper Coomera recently in my electorate along with the Minister for Health and the Minister for Home Affairs. Headspace does an incredible job in providing young people with a place where they can go and receive high-quality, youth-focused, inclusive mental health services. The centre's director told me that they appreciate the additional funding that the government's budget has brought and they appreciate that we've committed funds to provide 10 new headspace centres and upgrades to several satellite sites. They also appreciate the fact that we are rolling out a round of centre expansion funds for existing centres to increase their physical capacity to help manage demand. At Upper Coomera, the initial demand has been far exceeded with the requirements of the services they need to provide. In an area that's one of the fastest growing in Australia on the northern Gold Coast, their services have been very well received across the community. I'll also say that my late nephew was very involved in the headspace at Meadowbrook as part of the youth consultative committee and did a tremendous amount of work there and got a lot of support from headspace over the years as he struggled with mental health. This government has committed some $111.4 million to support the take-up of group therapy sessions and the participation of family and carers in treatment. We have also committed another $54.2 million to establish child mental health and wellbeing hubs to provide multidisciplinary care and preventive services. I have the pleasure of having two of these in my electorate of Forde, one at Eagleby State School and one at Norfolk Village State School, which I opened recently. Both of these wellbeing hubs provide multidisciplinary care, and the government provided $500,000 of funding to each of those through the community development grant scheme to provide those facilities. The facility at Eagleby and also the one at Norfolk Village State School provide high-level health services to students with complex needs and this includes assessment, diagnosis, development of management plans, intervention, supervision and professional health guidance. This means that, for these school communities, students will have onsite access to health providers and school staff will have access to adequate support. This means that parents don't have to take time off work in order to take children to appointments at hospitals that may be well distant to where they live. For many of these communities, that is a significant barrier. We know from the discussions with the community this will make it easier for students to receive the care they so desperately need and it will all add up to better care and better outcomes for these at-risk students. We know that early intervention is fundamental to better outcomes for mental health conditions, and that's why we support these initiatives. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 16:56 to 17:12 17:12 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I thank the member for Macquarie for this important motion. When it comes to public policy, surely nothing is more important than creating change to bring hope and health to the citizens we serve and, most especially, to our youngest citizens. When I think about suicide prevention, I think about how we create, maintain and restore hope. We have heard the statistics, but we must never lose sight that each statistic represents a person with a family and a community grieving for their loss, with devastating and long-lasting effects on those left behind. I know because, like thousands of families across Australia, my family lost a beloved family member to suicide: on 27 July, 2002; he was my brother-in-law, Pete. Suicide can affect anyone, but we know some populations are at greater risk. There is also no single reason why a person chooses to end their life. The reasons are often complex. The prevalence of people experiencing mental illness is similar across the nation—around 20 per cent—but that this is the leading cause of death for young people is devastating. Rates of self-harm and suicide increase with remoteness, suggesting there are very significant mental health issues to be addressed in rural and remote areas. Deaths by suicide are preventable. First things first: it's about removing the unrelenting stress incurred when the basics of daily life are not a sure thing. Suicide prevention starts when you never have to worry about having a safe home; when you can get the education you want; when you have a secure job that you enjoy with fair pay; when you know that your race, gender or sexuality will not impact how you live your life; when you're confident that there's a safety net there for you when things go wrong. Context and place are key to person centred suicide prevention, and there are some incredible local initiatives in my Indi electorate demonstrating how local people can taking action and bring hope. The fact that we have a headspace in our border region is a very real human story of an incredible family and a powerful community campaign. The Baker family from Albury lost their beautiful 15-year-old daughter, Mary, to suicide in 2011. Mary had an eating disorder, and suicide is 31 times more likely for someone with an eating disorder. Together with TheBorder Mail's End the Suicide Silence campaign, the people of the border successfully lobbied the federal government to get this facility. Annette and Stuart Baker didn't leave it there. They founded Survivors of Suicide and Friends and created the annual Winter Solstice event in Albury. This event, on 21 June, which will be live streamed this year, is an opportunity for communities to gather on the longest, and often coldest, night of the year to be entertained, enlightened and supported. Annette Baker says the Winter Solstice came out of a need to support locals who had lost a loved one to suicide and to remove the stigma associated with it. She said: 'Being the longest night of the year it can be a hard, dark time. I thought the winter solstice was a beautiful symbolic date to hold an event.' Last year, I was deeply honoured to recite a poem at the event, and this year our parliamentary colleague the Hon. Linda Burney will be the guest speaker. Another example in my community is in Benalla, with the Live4Life whole-of-community youth suicide prevention model, which began in 2017 and is being piloted by Benalla Rural City Council. Live4Life aims to increase the mental health knowledge of all year 8 and year 11 students and their teachers, parents and carers, and to reduce barriers to seeking help for emerging or current mental health issues in young people. The community partnership includes NE Tracks LLEN, Tomorrow Today Foundation, Victoria Police, Benalla Health, Central Hume Primary Care Partnership, NESAY, NECAHMS and local community members. So far, 508 years 7 to 9 students, 282 years 10 to 12 students and 25 adults have undertaken this training. The hard work of the Benalla community has been recognised and will be bolstered soon by a mental health hub funded by the Victorian government as part of its response to the Victorian mental health royal commission. The community can take great credit for this. These local examples show us that our efforts to prevent suicide must be informed by the insights offered by those who best understand the nature of suicidal distress. It is the knowledge of those with lived experience that must guide strategy, action and service provision to ensure a response that puts their needs at the forefront. 17:16 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I rise in this Chamber to speak on the member for Macquarie's motion on youth suicide. Mental health is as important as physical health. That's why the Morrison government has committed a record $2.3 billion to mental health and suicide prevention as part of the 2021 budget, the largest Australian government mental health investment in our history. I'm proud to be part of a government that has made a significant commitment to mental health, and in particular to youth mental health. There is no denying that there's been a very rapid increase in mental illness right across the spectrum, but it does unfairly target our young. That is partly because of the unique stresses that we are facing in a modern-day world. In my first speech I spoke of how I lost my cousin to suicide. He was a young man, only 25, who lived in the regions—in fact, he lived in the member for Indi's electorate, though many years ago—and had difficulty accessing services. I was pleased to hear in the speech from the member for Indi that that has now changed, and that is because of federal government investment. My cousin came from an extended family of doctors, but unfortunately there were no age-appropriate services available where he lived. As I said in my first speech, words like 'widow' and 'orphan' describe our losses, but no word in the English language describes the loss of a child. We should never give up hope of preventing these tragedies. Headspace is the government's flagship program for the provision of services to young people aged 12 to 25 experiencing or at risk of mental illness. Headspace is a safe and trusted entry point for young people seeking help. In 2019-20, headspace reported that 90 per cent of young people indicated being satisfied with the headspace services in their communities. This is particularly important because we know that young people's decision to access mental health care can be fragile. If they don't have a positive experience, they may not make another attempt to seek help. Just recently I was fortunate to have the Prime Minister visit the electorate of Higgins and our neighbouring electorate to visit headspace Elsternwick, which in 2007 was the very first headspace centre to open in Australia. In meeting with counsellors and the great former Australian of the Year Professor Pat McGorry, it was wonderful to be reminded of the brilliant services that these facilities and the workers in them are providing. I congratulate Pat for all the work that he has done to get these services off the ground. He's been a tireless advocate for headspace and youth mental health. Recognising the excellent work of headspace, we're also enhancing and expanding the network, with 10 new headspace services and five satellite services at a cost of $578 million, bringing the total number of headspace services throughout Australia to 164. This will include a headspace in Higgins, and we're looking forward to opening a temporary residence for the headspace in Higgins later this year. I'm delighted, because I know we really need one. When I spoke to headspace in Elsternwick, they told me they receive many referrals from my electorate of Higgins. Tragically, over 65,000 of our fellow Australians attempt to take their own lives each year. Around Australia, nine people die by suicide each and every day. Every year, more than 3,000 people lose their lives to suicide. It is, in fact, the leading cause of death among those aged 18 to 44. That's why we are funding two youth focused initiatives to the tune of $1.8 million to provide resources, roll out targeted campaigns and develop training material. It's also why our budget includes a National Suicide Prevention Office. Currently, the government's also funding 12 suicide prevention trials right across Australia, bringing together the best strategies and models to target people at risk of suicide. We're also investing a record amount of funding into suicide prevention services. Most importantly, we're providing funding to universal aftercare. No-one is more fragile than when they've attempted suicide and been to hospital. We need to wrap services around these people on their discharge to make sure that it doesn't happen in the vulnerable, fragile time after that period. I'm very proud to be a member of a government that recognises the need for youth mental health services and supports this as a priority. As a paediatrician and a mother, I appreciate just how important these services are to so many young Australians, and I'm passionate about being an advocate for better health outcomes four our young. 17:21 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell It appears the impact of COVID-19 on children and young people and their mental health and wellbeing has almost been forgotten by this government as it grapples with other problems. But we can't risk a generation of young Australians, and the risks start early in life. It's a common misconception that mental illness emerges for the first time in teenagers, but mental health struggles often begin earlier in life. Research from Beyond Blue shows that half of all mental health conditions experienced at some point in our lives will have started by 14, and three-quarters of mental health problems occur before the age of 25. As the Black Dog Institute pointed out in their children's mental health and wellbeing report, released last month, children who are struggling are at greater risk of continued problems into adolescence and adulthood, including long-term mental illness. That leads me to the July 2020 data released by headspace, which revealed half of young people felt their study and work situation had been negatively impacted by COVID-19. Figures show that young people under the age of 25 accounted for nearly half of all job losses during the pandemic, the single largest group. This government hasn't properly supported young people during the pandemic. Many young people working in casual jobs missed out on JobKeeper, many young people under 22 years who had lost their jobs missed on youth allowance, and the recent drop in JobSeeker has left many young people struggling to get by. That's before the impact of the fourth Victorian lockdown. ReachOut, an online mental health service for young people and their parents, had its busiest year in 2020, with 2.8 million people accessing ReachOut's youth service. Young people reported that mental health issues were exacerbated due to isolation, uncertainty and the loss of big milestones and enjoyable things in their daily lives, like getting to see their friends at school. Over 1.2 million people have accessed ReachOut's youth service site so far this year. The National Suicide Prevention Adviser's final report found the current approach to suicide prevention misses opportunities to support people because it predominantly focuses on health service response at the point of crisis. We need to intervene earlier, when suicidal distress is developing. Young people are less likely to seek professional help than any other age group. According to Beyond Blue, only 31 per cent of young women and 13 per cent of young men with mental health problems have sought any professional help. Unfortunately, when they do, the services they finally turn to to seek help are often overwhelmed, leading to long wait times. I'd like to share some of the experiences of one young person and her family. I'll call her Jane, and these are the words of her parents: 'Jane's first bout of suicidal ideation happened when she was nine. She couldn't cope with me being away, and she said she wanted to die in a hole or stick knives in a power point, because these are the things nine-year-olds know to speak of. Shortly after that she was diagnosed with ADHD. She'd been struggling with learning for a few years. I just didn't realise what it was. So aged nine she saw a publicly funded psychological service because CAMHS said she wasn't high risk enough. That early intervention service for eight to 12 year olds took four months for her to get into. She settled for a bit. Then last year her mood worsened. Her paediatrician added another medication and she started seeing her psychologist again. But this year she started self-harming again, cutting mostly, and then an admission for an overdose. She's lucky because I can afford private care for her at $220 a go every fortnight and she sees her GP and her paediatrician and it adds up. My friends tell my they can't even get in to see a psychologist at the moment privately or otherwise. Even when we got admitted to hospital that night, a fortnight ago, at 8 o'clock she was only seen by a psych registrar at 3 am and only because I pushed. And CAMHS were ready to leave us be, figuring she had a GP, a paediatrician and a psychologist but we needed support as a family so I made them visit us.' She goes on: 'Honestly the mental health state of kids Jane knows is depressing in itself. It's like a cancer spreading through teens. And parents are floundering because we don't know why it's so bad and how to help.' In the week before the 2019 election the government announced $1.5 million for a new headspace for Wyong. It was posted on Minister Hunt's Facebook page on 24 August 2019. In the two years since headspace Wyong is yet to be delivered. There are so many young people living outside of big cities, in the outer suburbs and in regional Australia, who are struggling to get by. When they turn for help it's not available because of under-resourcing and long wait times. When I spoke to Minister Hunt yesterday he said headspace Wyong was the top of the list. It better be. 17:27 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein Like many members it's a mixture of emotions to speak on a motion such as this, because many Australians have had lives that have been touched by the sad and tragic early passing of their friends or family as a consequence of suicide. Those who may have previously watched this chamber before may know that, sadly, my brother-in-law committed suicide a few years ago. And I know that other people have had similar experiences and that's why it's so difficult to talk about this issue, but it's also the reason we need to talk about this issue. Tragically suicide is the leading cause of death in people, particularly between the ages of 15 to 24 and 25 to 44, since 2016 and 2018. We know that because of consequences of mental health problems and other pressures in people's lives increasingly people feel more fragile, and as a consequence they're taking their last resort—as what they see to be a legitimate pathway. But suicide is never legitimate pathway whatever the difficulty that people face. It's incumbent on the rest of us to do what whatever we can do to support those who are facing difficulty. It's particularly pressing at this time because we know in the great state of Victoria, during its fourth lockdown, the pressures of mental health challenges that many Victorians are facing right now are significant. In fact, only earlier this afternoon I was chatting to a constituent and friend of mine, who wanted to talk about an unrelated matter. I asked him how things were going within the community and he talked about his wife and how she had recently, meaning in the past 24 hours, had a work colleague who had committed suicide. Of course that has an impact on her and her family, but also, of course, the broader community. Another tragic life has been needlessly lost because of the pressures that people face. I'm not seeking to blame that on anyone in particular, I'm just trying to make the observation that this is, sadly, a common occurrence that occurred during the last lockdown. A number of people that I know, including a number within the Goldstein community, and I'm sure it's replicated elsewhere—and I see other members from Victoria here as well who have confronted the reality of people within their communities. Often a person seems to do well and is not somebody who we would normally say is struggling or not coping. They may be running a successful small business or may even be a proud parent, but because they are faced with darker demons or other challenges in their lives, which may have been brought about as a consequence of the lockdown, they make a fatal choice. I know, certainly, that my husband, Ryan, had a former colleague who took that option. I also know of some local small business people who couldn't see a pathway out during a gruelling three-month lockdown and the impact that it was having on them. They couldn't see whether they were going to be able to rebuild as they watched their entire lives and the rewards of their hard work disappear in front of them. Of course we know that there are many programs targeted specifically at supporting people who are facing mental health conditions, particularly in the context of suicide. In the Goldstein electorate we have a headspace clinic in Bentleigh, and there is one in Elsternwick, just on our border with Higgins. Headspace plays a particularly important role in getting to the community and, in particular, marginalised sections of the community to provide mental health care and support, whether it's to people of different ethnic backgrounds and culturally and linguistically diverse communities or to people of diverse sexual orientations or gender identities. Of course, amongst the general community, headspace works with local schools, local mental health practitioners and local support staff so that they can get support. We thank them every day for the important work that they do. During the lockdown last year we actually did a video. It is on the Goldstein page and Tim Wilson MP Facebook page, so, if you need to, you can go back and have a look at it again. The video works through the local mental health supporters and shows the assistance that headspace in Bentleigh can provide to young people who are struggling at this difficult time. We may even repost that as a consequence of the present lockdown, in case people need that assistance and support. Of course, government plays a critical role in that conversation. One of the leading contributions, particularly throughout last year's lockdown, although it has also continued until today, is the significant package that has been provided by the Morrison government to support people with mental health needs during this time. Hopefully, they won't be needed further, but it's critical that they're available for those who need them. 17:32 Mr BYRNE 008K0 Holt I rise to support the member for Macquarie's private members' motion on mental health, which notes that suicide is the leading cause of death amongst Australians aged 15 to 24. If you read the statistics from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 384 young people took their own lives in 2019. Then, if you talk about suicide, 96 of those were by suicide. Deaths by suicide represented 40 per cent of all deaths in young people aged 15 to 17 and 36 per cent of all deaths in those aged between 18 to 24, which is up from approximately 25 per cent of all deaths in these age groups in 2010. You read that data and you're horrified. I had the lived experience of this when we had a suicide cluster in the south-eastern region in 2011 and 2012. During that time, you would see on occasion, as you drove to work, the name of a young person on a bridge, or you'd see on Facebook the loss of a young person, and then another young person, and then another young person. There was a sense of community helplessness as to what to do. I think the member for Indi was talking about Albury and the work that Professor Pat McGorry had done there. He also did incredible work down in the south-eastern region of Melbourne during that time, which I think has literally saved lives. Because of what had actually happened prior to that and prior to Professor McGorry coming in, we actually called Pat in. He had been dealing with the issue of appropriate mental health facilities in Albury to deal with this suicide cluster, and we asked him to do the same thing, which he did. He came down and, in 2012, we conducted a forum that was covered by Four Corners. They produced a program on it called 'There is No 3G in Heaven'. It featured some of the people we'd actually lost. We conducted that forum, with Pat McGorry facilitating it. It's impossible to describe to this chamber, or to anybody, being there and watching the parents of young people get up and describe the impact of the loss of their child. We had eight or nine parents get up and describe it, and describe how—one of the things we don't discuss is method; we don't want to discuss method. But there was a particularly brutal method being used by very desperate young people in 2011. It traumatised an entire community. We lobbied for Professor McGorry to come down to the area. There is No 3G in Heaven is a very confronting program. As a result of that—and I pay great tribute to then mental health minister Mark Butler—two headspace centres were funded by the Gillard government and an early youth psychosis centre was overlayed with that. I think headspace Dandenong is in the electorate of the member for Bruce and I think headspace Narre Warren is now in the electorate of La Trobe, but it could also be in Bruce—who knows, with the redistribution. He might have two in his electorate, and that's a good thing. My electorate extends out to Cranbourne. It would be great to have a headspace in Cranbourne. I welcome the investment from the federal government and also the state government. The Victorian state government has invested over $3 billion in mental health. I worked in the mental health space between 1994 and 1996 as chief executive officer of a mental health organisation. I remember participating in what was called the first national mental health strategy. The discussion was about young people and others not accessing mental health services because of the stigma. I would say that we still confront that as a barrier to people, particularly from non-English speaking backgrounds, accessing services. There are so many young people that I speak to who are struggling with issues but who still will not go to a health service provider, a doctor, or even a clinic or a headspace because of the perceived stigma of mental health issues in their community. So, whilst I welcome this investment, it is quite worrisome when you talk to a young woman who's got a tertiary degree but who wouldn't for the life of her go and access a service because of the stigma. Whilst I certainly welcome the member for Macquarie's motion, there is much, much more that needs to be done to confront the stigma so that we can encourage people to access these services. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. COVID-19: Travel Cancellation 145 17:37 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong by leave—On behalf of the member for Menzies, I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) the COVID-19 crisis has caused the cancellation or delay of flights and other travel for many Australians; (b) many Australians have experienced considerable difficulty in obtaining the refund of monies paid for travel, accommodation and other tourist activities; (c) while many travel agents have acted with integrity and fairness, some have not done so; and (d) the COVID-19 crisis has exposed the absence of consumer protections for Australian travellers; and (2) urges Australian governments to enact legislation that: (a) provides consumers with a right to a refund if the service they paid for hasn't been fulfilled due to situations outside of human control; (b) establishes mandatory trust accounts for all travel agents, including online travel agents; (c) provides for transparent fee for service for all travel agents with no hidden costs; and (d) ensures that supplier terms and conditions are provided to customers by travel agents. Obviously I am not the member for Menzies, unless he's had a late growth spurt! Unfortunately, he is unwell—there is a doctor in the House today—so I have taken his spot and wish him a quick recovery. I was already going to speak on this motion, however, as this is an issue which I know has affected many people in my electorate of Bennelong, and I'm very happy to move the motion in his name. The surprises of 2020 affected everybody in some way. We have spoken a lot in this place about the businesses that struggled, and there's been plenty said about the way our health system has scrambled and adapted. We have sympathised with cafe owners, praised nurses and supported the unemployed. One of the more pervasive casualties of 2020 is confidence—not that we aren't confident we will get through this; that confidence remains high. Rather, it is the uncertainty about when we will return to normal. Everyone knows someone who has made a plan where the light was visible at the end of the tunnel, only to have it dashed as their town returned to a snap lockdown. Victorians are feeling this acutely right now. Many of these dashed plans have been in travel. Australia is a nation of tourists, and when borders shut, planes stopped flying and cruise ships remained in the dock there were hundreds of thousands of people who were left out of pocket. Many of them were subsequently made whole again through refunds. Some were issued with vouchers that they still haven't been able to use. Regrettably, some will not see all of their money again. The ACCC highlights that the terms and conditions relating to refunds or vouchers differ, and the rules at the time of the booking are those which must be followed. Terms and conditions vary between travel providers, and in some cases consumers might not be entitled to a full refund or any refund of their booking. But the pandemic has made clear the need for an overarching system and to bring some transparency to the market. Over the past year, I have been contacted by constituents who have experienced difficulties in receiving credits or refunds for trips that were cancelled, postponed or disrupted due to COVID-19. Holidays months and even years in the planning could no longer proceed. What would have been times of great joy, excitement and happy memories unfortunately turned to stress, panic and financial loss. As an example, I recently met with a constituent whose trip to Europe in March last year was quickly turned into panic as the rapidly escalating COVID-19 outbreak, particularly in Italy, saw their trip disrupted and led to them ending their holiday and having to purchase their own flights back home. Even after all this time and after raising their case with the ACCC, Fair Trading and NCAT, they are still fighting to recoup their losses for a holiday that wasn't able to happen. The financial toll is one thing, but the emotional and mental impact these types of experiences have on individuals is equally, if not more, significant. It is worth stating clearly, as this motion does, that many of the tourism operators and providers are honourable and reputable and have sought to do the right thing here. I have spoken in this place previously about the hardships faced by travel agents across Bennelong, and I stand by those words and sentiments today. We must create a system that not only insulates future travellers from future upheaval but also gives businesses the certainty that they need to survive and the openness to maintain the faith of their customers. It has been pointed out that Australia is fairly isolated and outdated in our consumer laws in this area. In the EU, for example, anybody who has a flight cancelled or delayed by 90 minutes, which can't be rerouted, is automatically provided with a full refund. Similarly in the United States, any cancelled flight results in an automatic refund of the cost. Creating similar laws here shouldn't be too difficult. We are rightly proud of the consumer protections in this country. They are seen as being beneficial to business and beneficial to consumer confidence. If there is one thing that could give our struggling travel industry a shot in the arm, it is an injection of consumer confidence. Enacting these laws could provide the confidence that Australians need to get travelling again and get our travel companies back on their feet. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 Is the motion seconded? Dr Freelander 265979 I second the motion and I reserve my right to speak. Mr Hill 86256 We're all bipartisan here! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 It's an outbreak of bipartisanship! Excellent. 17:43 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark The travel and tourism industries obviously remain in dire straits. Among other problems, thousands of Australians are still chasing refunds for holidays that were cancelled because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, my office continues to be approached by constituents who are struggling to get their money back for flights and holidays booked more than 12 months ago. Compounding these problems for consumers is, of course, that Australian legislation does not guarantee refunds when travel is disrupted due to external forces such as border closures. In other words, whether it be airlines, travel agencies, tour companies, cruise lines, rail companies, wholesalers, package holiday companies or travel insurance providers, there are simply no laws in place to protect consumers. That is why I'm supporting this motion by the member for Menzies. On top of the physical and emotional stress of the pandemic, the financial burden experienced by many Australians over the past 15 months or so has been enormous, most obviously from job losses, reduced work hours and difficult trading conditions. But it's also included purchases not honoured, especially in the travel and tourism sectors. One particular constituent was given no choice but to accept a $15,000 flight credit voucher valid for just 12 months and with limitations on the way the credit could be used. For instance, only one trip can be booked at a time and that trip must be taken before another can be booked. So, by my calculations, the constituent would probably need to go on at least one trip per month in order to spend this amount in domestic airfares. While that might sound lovely to some people, in reality it would be entirely impractical and end up costing far more in accommodation et cetera. It's ridiculous. Another constituent has been chasing a refund through Jetstar or, as he calls it, 'theft star'. The flight was booked via Flight Centre. For over 12 months the man was told he was ineligible to receive a credit for his flight and no credit for the additional baggage fees. Only last Friday, after 12 months, and countless calls and emails, did he finally receive the flight credit. Obtaining a refund has been especially hard for the vulnerable in our community. For example, Australians without internet access or the knowledge of how to follow up on travel cancellations have been severely disadvantaged. There was the elderly couple who approached my office that were offered a credit for a cancelled flight even though one partner is very ill and unlikely to ever travel again. Yes, in this case, the credit has now been extended for a further 12 months and they have been told other family members can use the voucher. But this is not good enough, because this couple should be entitled to a full refund without having to fight for their rights. The big companies are letting people down. It is not just flight cost refunds that consumers are chasing. For instance, some service providers are also refusing or unable to repay clients as they have already used the cash to keep their businesses alive. Currently, the ACCC states that consumers' eligibility for a credit or refund depends on the terms and conditions of their purchase, but how often does someone read every word of the Ts and Cs? Even if they are provided to customers before confirmation of booking, as stated in this motion, there still need to be further consumer protections. Sure, few people would have predicted the impact of COVID-19 on travel and tourism, but the bottom line is that the current consumer laws just don't cover it and that needs to be remedied. Mind you, there are obviously two sides to this matter, because, to be fair, travel agents are doing it tough as well, not least of which because often the outstanding money consumers are seeking is actually being held by downstream service providers who don't always want to cough it up. The significant time it takes travel agents to help consumers obtain their refunds is not paid work for the travel agents. That's all against a backdrop of almost no lucrative international travel booking income for those businesses. That is why reform of the travel industry is just as necessary for travel agents as it is for consumers. Consumers and often their travel agents are being hung out to dry here, but the situation can be remedied. That's why I strongly support this motion and trust the government will pay attention and act on it. 17:48 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's a great pleasure to be able to speak on this motion moved by the member for Menzies and also after the contributions of the member of Bennelong and the member for Clark. The experience that I have had as the member for Goldstein, as I'm sure many other members have throughout the past year, is of many constituents who, through no fault of their own, booked travel arrangements, flights, accommodation, operations, tours et cetera overseas, or even within Australia, but suddenly found their arrangements abruptly cut short as a consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Particularly there have been issues around insurance and the pandemic exemptions, but also a lot of constituents are finding it very difficult to get refunds and/or even credits in some cases—or usable credits, I should say, more correctly—for bookings that have been made. In particular, I'd like to reiterate the point the member for Clark raised. Firstly, travel agents often are the meat in the sandwich, for want of a better phrase, between the consumer and the travel operator and have been unfairly maligned. I have a lot of travel agents within the Goldstein electorate who do an excellent job every day in helping Australians realise their travel dreams, but they are often only the booking agents and, of course, take a fee, because that's how they have their business model running, but often are required to pay money internationally or domestically are the ones responsible for recouping that money in the time frame. It's particularly common when money goes overseas and people are making bookings in Australia for services overseas and recouping that money or, in the case of many tour arrangements where credit may be offered but they may expire within a time frame, as we're experiencing right now—for instance, a 12 month time frame, which means that people aren't able to use them, because of the continued closure of international borders. So there's something that needs to be done in this space. I have spoken to the Chair of the ACCC, Rod Sims, in our economics committee hearings and asked him what he thinks needs to be done. He has actually made the comment that he doesn't believe a lot needs to be done. What we're seeing in the parliament is that that isn't enough or that isn't acceptable. There is an expectation that there has to be some sort of rebalancing to protect the rights of consumers and their choices and also make sure that they're not taken advantage of or, when their money is taken, there is a sense of responsibility that flows through with it. Many of the travel agents I speak to about constituents who complain about not being able to get their money back often are dependent on the actions of others. From this experience, there needs to be some sort of understanding, obligation and contractual arrangements into the future where travel agents expect obligations to flow through and to make sure that operators do the right thing by customers so they don't get left in the middle. But I know, as many members will, that throughout the past 12 months many people have made these bookings and sought consumer protections on the simple basis of expecting either their money to be refunded or, as I said before, some sort of credit, and have found themselves either in Australia or overseas essentially giving up because the volume of money, while perhaps not being insignificant, actually is placing an emotional burden on themselves to try to recoup it. In many cases people, of course, even got those credits but are not able to use them. So I think it's critically important that we look at consumer protection and have a proper analysis of what it means in a potential age of future pandemics but also around the general operation of consumer protections from disruption. I know this is a big issue for the insurance industry. This is not just because of general exemptions associated with pandemics but also because of other aligned issues like business interruption and the need to do so. Of course, the Morrison government has been very aware of the impact this is having on many small businesses, particularly around issues of cash flow when they're required to make reimbursements for people seeking to recoup their money. That's why we've provided support to the travel sector, whether it's directly to the providers or, in addition, to many of the travel agents. But that's really only to carry them over the bridge, as we used to call it; it doesn't solve the fundamental woes that sit at the heart of it. They have been stretched by trying to meet their obligations to consumers. We need proper and responsibilities placed on those who book services to make sure that actions are properly taken, but it does require review. It does require some form of inquiry to properly address. 17:53 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga [by video link] It's a pleasure to speak on this motion today. As many members have already said, I have heard through this pandemic of many consumers who were ready to take the trip of a lifetime when this pandemic hit and who since it hit have had to deal with the fact that that trip of a lifetime didn't come off and with the difficulties of refunds and cancellations that sometimes exist in this space. I have also spoken a lot with travel agents, who have dealt with the entire disruption of their business and who have worked so hard in so many cases to support people who had bookings with them and deal with a change that happened overnight through no fault of their own, through no decision that they made, where essentially their business has been turned on its head. So there is no doubt that, from both a consumer point of view and a travel agent point of view, COVID has upended the travel industry. It is entirely appropriate that, as members, we look at what that means for both travel agents and consumers and at how, hopefully coming out of this pandemic, we can build a system that works strongly for everyone. I do know, from talking with travel agents in my electorate about what's been happening to them during this time, that many of them have gone through significant hardships, and I want to really thank them for their efforts and their stoicism and for the support they have given to consumers. The travel industry was not a system that was designed to work backwards, and I know that, in the days after shutdown, travel agents were desperately trying to work out what information they had, what advice they could follow, and what outcomes they could provide for consumers, and that has meant that consumers have had differing outcomes. It's been really stressful for consumers. As I said, many of them were looking forward to the trip of a lifetime. They'd spent a lot of time planning and had spent a lot of money, and they were left with no idea of how or exactly when they would get refunds. As the pandemic went on, some of the confusion continued for both consumers and travel agents, and there were communication breakdowns and, in some cases, unfortunately, conflicting information. I think that's been really hard for consumers. There are many agents who acted with integrity and fairness and who have gone over and above to obtain refunds for their clients, in some cases refunding money from their own accounts. Other consumers have lost money or have been left frustrated, as I said, in being able to get clear information about what's happened and what their recourse in this situation is. I do know there are still people who are waiting for refunds and how hard that must be for all those people involved. I want to particularly thank Linda and Darryl Wallace from Eltham North in my electorate, who came to me to share some of the frustrations and disappointments that they've had in this space. They were some of those people who'd booked the trip of a lifetime and who had spent a lot of time planning but who then not only had to give up that experience but felt they had to spend a lot of time looking at why they were refunded for some parts of their trip and not for other parts. They had to try, own their own, to figure out what had happened and where transactions were sitting. Their hope is very much that, going forward, there will be a system in place that resolves some of these issues. As we have heard from other members who have already spoken to this motion, a system in place that resolves some of these issues will hopefully be in the best interests of both consumers and travel agents. It means we rebuild a system that consumers feel confident to use and that travel agents feel doesn't provide them with a level of confusion that may be preventing them from doing their work at the moment. So, while there are parts of this motion that, from a practical standpoint, would need to be worked through, such as the use of trust funds, I do support any motion that would assist travel agents and consumers. We know that this outbreak has challenged the industry like never before, and this is the opportunity for us to build back better to make sure there are consumer protections in place and that we support travel agents, who are desperate to see for positive outcomes for their clients. So I support this motion. 17:58 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I rise to speak on the motion put forward by the member for Menzies. The travel and tourism industry has been impacted profoundly by the pandemic. Holidays and travel plans were cancelled en masse and some consumers have struggled to obtain refunds for their bookings. I have heard from many travel agents in my electorate about how hard they are working to obtain full refunds for their clients. While I acknowledge that a delay in refunds is not ideal, the impact of the pandemic on this sector has been so devastating, and I understand the call for changes to be made. From the evidence that my office has received, the majority of those who made bookings via a travel agent have received refunds quicker than those who made bookings online or directly with some airlines or providers overseas. A constituent did contact me asking me to support the petition that led to the development of this motion. While I appreciate the struggles of consumers to get their refunds, I believe that the vast majority of travel agents are working very hard to secure refunds for their clients. The government recognises effort and the need to support travel agents to obtain refunds through the establishment of the consumer travel support grant. I welcome the extension of that grant to phase 2. Now that the government has declared that the borders will remain closed until mid-2022, I urge the minister to consider developing a long-term plan for this sector to support travel agents through this difficult time. A one-off grant every three months without certainty of whether there will be another grant in three months time is no way to operate a business. It does not provide the certainty that these businesses need to continue to employ staff and to fight for the refunds for their customers. We will lose so much expertise and work experience if all these businesses close. In March I hosted a roundtable with the travel agents of Warringah. The Australian Federation of Travel Agents attended. The forum raised several issues faced by Warringah travel agents—and I suspect it was not unique to Warringah. Border closers, domestic and international, and lack of certainty around when they will reopen are major issues for people planning. There is perceived misunderstanding of the role of travel agents and the need for them to support the general public. There are difficulties with the viability of domestic bookings to sustains travel agents due to a lack of availability of domestic accommodation and tour operators and an inability to take commissions on domestic airfares. The minister has repeatedly said that his solution around domestic travel would solve this sector. It does not. These travel agents are not being assisted and are hanging on for dear life. Some agents and providers are not recognised as travel agents for the purpose of the grant program due to tax classification and so they are left in indefinite limbo. I urge the government to make a commitment for rounds 3, 4 and 5 of the grants. They need to increase the ceiling of the grants. They need to consider providing the grants as fortnightly payment schemes, similar to JobKeeper, so that agents don't take the money and leave the industry. There is currently a risk of that because it's only every three months. We need grant approval for a number of cruise ships to enter Australian waters to service the Kimberley cruise season. We need to develop a roadmap for opening the borders, considering the vaccine rollout schedule. There have been 14 months now where we have had a closed international border, the only OECD and developed country to have that—the most extreme measure. There must be a long-term plan to ensure that 'bubble Australia' is not an indefinite bubble. There are so many sectors that require the safe reopening of our borders. The first step being that we need a vaccine rollout that is accelerated and we need fit for purpose quarantine facilities. I have to thank the hard-working travel agents of Warringah and acknowledge the impact of this pandemic on their businesses. I welcome the suggestions for improvements to consumer law, but I caution that any change must be applied to the tourism sector as a whole. You can't be picking favourites. Travel agents cannot bear the brunt of further regulation or change at this point in time. So many of the members of this industry are just hanging on. They desperately need there to be more stimulus and more focus on how their sector, and their knowledge and expertise, can be maintained. At my roundtable I heard so much of staff being let off, so much expertise being lost. When bubble Australia bursts and people do come back here we simply will not have the knowledge or travel agents in operation to service them. I support the motion but I have concerns. 18:03 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I rise to second the motion that was originally brought forward by the member for Menzies, who unfortunately has been taken unwell. I do wish him a speedy recovery. I'm sure that he will make a speedy recovery. I have seconded the motion because the motion does highlight some of the hardships faced by both consumers and travel agents during this recent pandemic. It gives us an opportunity to reset. The COVID-19 pandemic has very negatively affected countless sectors of our economy. Unlike the Prime Minister, I don't believe that everyone is in this together. There are certainly some sectors that have been affected much more severely than others, and the travel industry is one of those. I, like the other members present, have met with the travel agents from my electorate of Macarthur. I do feel for them, and I thank them for the hard work, often not paid work, they have undertaken to try to ensure consumers are treated fairly. Flights and travel plans have been delayed and cancelled in many instances, and travel agents and consumers have been experiencing financial hardship and significant insecurity about travel during the pandemic. The pandemic, of course, continues to push back our return to normal travel. It is still very unclear as to when our borders will reopen successfully, because, as we know, this virus is behaving in ways that are still to be determined. The most recent variants appear to be much more infectious and much more transmissible. There is a possibility that the new variants—particularly the double mutation, the B.1.617 mutation—are affecting younger people as well. So it's still very unclear as to when our borders will reopen and still very unclear as to when our travel industry will get back to near normal or pre-COVID normal. Many thousands of Australian consumers are struggling to retain refunds for holidays they booked through travel agents, despite it being in some of the travel agents' best interests. In my electorate of Macarthur, I must say, every travel agent that I know has behaved in an exemplary manner, but consumers are often struggling to get refunds from foreign agencies and foreign airlines, and many have visited me in my rooms to see what I could do to help them. Two people in particular were two sisters who worked in the education system. They weren't wealthy people. They'd scrimped and saved, had taken their long service leave and had booked an overseas holiday—the holiday of a lifetime—to travel Africa together. They were very much looking forward to it but, for the obvious reasons of the pandemic and our border closures, they were unable to take that holiday. They tried to get refunds. They'd already taken their long service leave. They were given travel vouchers for foreign airlines and foreign hotels, and these are valid until December this year. Of course, it's extremely unlikely, even if they can get some other leave, that they'll be able to take that holiday. I think it's very unlikely that our borders will be open by then. They've asked for refunds, but have been unable to get those refunds, for tens of thousands of dollars. I feel deeply for these women, and I think it's time that we looked to reset how travel plans work so consumers can get the refunds they are entitled to. This would bring more certainty to the industry. It would encourage more people to book holidays, both inside and outside Australia, and it would enable our system to be much more consumer friendly. Exactly how we redefine the system remains to be seen, but I think the minister and this government should look very hard at how we can refine our travel refund system to make sure consumers are protected in all instances. COVID-19 has had a really negative effect on our travel industry. We must get confidence back and we must allow consumers to feel that if, for reasons beyond their control, they need to get refunds they will be able to get them. 18:08 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore Thank you to the member for Menzies for this motion calling for a better system to protect travel consumers and travel agents. In my electorate on the New South Wales South Coast I have a lot of wonderful elderly people and people getting close to retirement. It's no surprise that, having worked hard all their lives, they now want to travel. They plan meticulously, often with the help of their trusted local travel agent. They pop into their local travel agent and have a chat, and they know that if they have a question their local travel agent is always only a phone call away. That's what it's like in the country all along our coast: travel agents look after their customers and their communities, and customers look after their travel agents. But bushfires, floods and then the COVID pandemic have taken their toll on everyone. I have spoken often about this in parliament. From very early on, I have talked with many local travel agents. I've seen and felt their pain and their tears. They are working around the clock to process refunds and to look after their clients, not to get paid but because it was the right thing to do. Shayne told me how she worked two other jobs to stay afloat and processed refunds. I listened to Joanne's heartbreaking story when she told me she wished her business hadn't been so successful because now she had to undo each tour, bit by bit. Bob from Gerringong has been a travel agent for over 40 years and said he's never seen things this bad. I met with Emma, Lindy and Jennie. Between them they have almost 100 years of experience in the travel industry. They came to me with suggestions for the future about how things should be made better to protect travellers and travel agents. I have had many, many constituents come to me who had booked travel only to go down the path of trying to get a refund. Most reported not being able to get through to many of the larger online travel providers. Some were eventually given partial credits. I have referred many people to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. I have written to the minister, but, for many people, there has been little joy. Kathy came to see me and told me her story. In December 2019, Kathy and her husband paid $23,000 to Travelmarvel which comes under the APT umbrella. Kathy and her husband were going on the trip of a lifetime to Canada and Alaska. However, the tour was cancelled in April 2020 due to COVID-19. Initially they were offered a full credit voucher. However, given their age, health and personal circumstances, they requested a refund. Of that $23,000, they were offered a refund of $17,000, so they requested a breakdown of those irrecoverable costs. They refused to give them a breakdown of the costs, so they went to their insurance company. The insurance company initially refused to refund the gap of $6,000 because they were offered the credit. Kathy sought help from consumer advocate Adam Glezer who suggested Kathy lodge a complaint with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. Adam was another disgruntled Flight Centre customer turned consumer advocate who is calling for a major shake-up to how customers using travel companies are protected. So Kathy lodged a complaint with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority. In this case, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority ordered the insurance company to pay the gap, which they did. Overall, Kathy and her husband did get their money back eventually, but it took a lot of work over a long period of time. And, as Kathy says, a lot of other people would have given up. What is clear through this terrible ordeal is that customers and agents need better protections. If this can be done overseas, then so too can it be done in Australia. Consumers should have a right to a refund if the service they paid for hasn't been fulfilled due to situations outside of human control. There should be mandatory trust accounts for all travel agents, including online travel agents—and many of my local travel agents have raised this—so that customers are protected. There should be greater transparency around fees for service, so that there are no hidden costs, and travel agents should ensure that supplier terms and conditions are provided to customers. I hope to see many of my constituents travelling again soon with their local travel agents, but we need better protections for all. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HYM There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Economy: Wages Growth 151 18:13 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite I move: That this House: (1) recognise that under this Government, Australia has experienced near stagnant wage growth; (2) notes that: (a) low wages are a deliberate design feature of this Government's economic policy; (b) the budget showed real wages for Australian workers are expected to fall under this Government; (c) budget figures show that Australia is wealthier than we expected but there will be no meaningful benefit of that higher wealth to the wages and salaries of Australians; and (d) while all Australians deserve a pay rise, women, especially suffer under this Government's wage-failure due to the enormous 13.4 per cent gender wage gap; and (3) calls on the Government to put the Australian people at the centre of their economic decision making and get wages moving again, starting with an increase to the minimum wage. After eight long years of job insecurity, weak wages growth and rising underemployment, this government remains committed to wage suppression and historically low wages growth. Amazingly, in 2019, former finance minister Senator Cormann confirmed this. He said in an interview, 'Low wages is a deliberate design feature of our economic architecture.' It's amazing, really, to be proud of actively pursuing the flatlining of wages and less money in people's pockets. Sadly, nothing has changed. The Morrison government continues to have the dubious honour of presiding over the longest period of low wages growth in our living history, with a projected figure of 1.25 expected in the next financial year. This obsession with keeping wages as low as possible is accompanied by an attack on our industrial relations system and workers' bargaining powers, mechanisms that give workers a say about their wages and the conditions under which they work. But the Prime Minister and his Treasurer somehow continue to believe this is the way to stimulate the economy. But, according to leading economists, it will do just the opposite. Chief economist at the Australia Institute, Richard Denniss, says the Treasurer has 'missed the opportunity' to help those on lower wages. He said: The easiest way to get people spending a lot would be to boost the wages of low income earners, to boost the benefits of the lowest income earners in the country. Mr Denniss's words make absolute sense, because if people have no disposable income they will not spend, and no spending means less money in the economy to grow jobs, boost business and increase wages. But, more importantly, this inept approach means people are stymied. Many will be left behind and others will struggle to reach their potential. Such missed opportunities are tragic, lack vision and do nothing to stimulate our economy or investment in emerging industries and smart minds. If the Morrison government wants to ever get back to producing those 'back in the black' coffee mugs it will need to do a complete turnaround, ditch trickledown economics and instead have a plan that boosts wages for our low-income earners. But, while this makes sense, it's unlikely. The Morrison government's blueprint for this country leaves workers with a 2¼ per cent real pay cut this financial year and a quarter per cent real pay cut next financial year. In 2023 and 2024, there will be no real wage growth under this government. That adds up to 11 years of coalition failure, 11 years of putting Australian wages and salaries at the bottom of their priority list. For a relatively wealthy nation, this is a cruel blow. You would hope that government would want workers to share in the wealth they have helped to create, but that is not this government's modus operandi. As we know, the Morrison government have deliberately built in low wages as a design feature of their economic policy. Shame on them. It is women who are often worse off. Currently Australia's national gender pay gap is 13.4 per cent for full-time employees, with women on average earning $242.20 less each week than men. While men suffer under woeful wages growth, women suffer more. We simply cannot tolerate that. Women should get equal pay for what they do. Women should earn the same superannuation. So Labor will fight to build an economy that's stronger and fairer and we will put wage growth at its centre. Labor will put wages as first priority. We will begin moving them and we will start with an increase to the minimum wage. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HYM Is the motion seconded? Dr FREELANDER 265979 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 18:18 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm I welcome the opportunity to talk about wage growth. But, before I start, I must say: if you don't have a job, it's absolutely meaningless to talk about wage growth. The Morrison government is a government that understands the importance of empowering Australian men and women to be able to raise themselves up. We understand that the Australian people need a hand up, and it's the role of the government to provide that hand up. This is why we supported the Australian people with the JobKeeper and JobSeeker packages, ensuring that through a time of global hardship no-one in our country was left behind. Beyond that, we have emphasised the need for getting Australians back into work, creating the JobMaker scheme to make this happen. We are coming out of a global economic shock that bears similarities to the Great Depression. While that period was bleak for all those alive at the time, here in Australia our economy is already bouncing back at an envious rate. This is partly due to the Morrison government's commitment to jobs and getting the unemployment rate below pre-crisis level. In doing so, our government will deliver stronger wages growth for hardworking Australians. We recognise the link between low unemployment and stronger wages growth, and we will fight for all Australians to get this done. Under the careful and considered hand of the Morrison government, the unemployment rate is forecast to get back to pre-crisis levels just two years after its peak. This is a remarkable effort when you consider that it took eight years to return to pre-crisis levels after the recession of the 1980s, and 10 years after the 1990s recession. With Treasury and the RBA forecasting unemployment to fall below five per cent by the end of next year, it's clear that the Morrison government has been delivering on its promise to the Australian people of a stronger economy, and with that comes stronger wages for hardworking Australians. I would like to note that after the last global financial crisis, when Labor was in power, they were never able to get unemployment back to where it was. Do you know why this was? It's because Labor are poor economic managers. A tale as old as time, but it's a reliable adage. Labor may be quick to forget the damage they inflicted on the Australian people by letting unemployment remain high. This remains the case for one of two reasons: either they weren't interested in lowering it, or they didn't know how to. I don't know which is worse. The Morrison government has no interest in repeating the mistakes that the Labor Party made. Instead, our government is ensuring that Australians have the opportunity to increase their skills and knowledge to easily get back into the workforce. Our government is delivering tax cuts for more Australians to put money back where it belongs: in the pockets of the Australian people. We know the importance of giving Australians their own financial cushion to lean on for support, and the tax cuts we have delivered will provide that. The Morrison government's tax cuts have meant that household incomes have continued to grow in every quarter and are up 4.8 per cent over the year. The Morrison government is a government of sound economic management and will continue to deliver for the Australian people. 18:24 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons I thank the member for Corangamite for bringing this motion forward. This motion is clear. It concisely outlines matters on the public record about the Morrison government's incompetent mismanagement of wage growth, and it points back to one key point: this government's inability to manage the economy, through failing to recognise the importance of wages growth. Under the coalition, Australians have endured eight years of record lows in wages growth. We've seen more than 40 consecutive incorrect forecasts, overestimating wages growth through seven Liberal budgets and seven updates. They always announce higher wages, but they never deliver them. Last month we saw in black and white on page 9 on the budget a cut to real wages over the next four years. This Liberal government has condemned Australia to our weakest annual growth in wages on record, and it has done so deliberately. Former finance minister Mathias Cormann admitted on TV that low wages are 'a deliberate design feature' of coalition economic architecture—deliberate. And we know why. To the Liberals, Australian workers are just a business cost to be kept as low as possible. They believe this releases more money for business owners to invest. We heard it right there from the member for Chisholm: 'You can have either low unemployment or high wages, but you can't have both.' So she wants to condemn this country to a low-wage future. That's their vision for this country. We saw in the parliament today the Treasurer extolling the virtues of, apparently, a booming economy under his stewardship, but it's a different story he was telling the Fair Work Commission as the government fought the minimum wage case, saying that they can't afford a decent rise in the minimum wage because of 'uncertain outlook in the economy'. So they're telling the parliament one thing—that the place is going gangbusters—but, in the documents that they provide to officials, there's an uncertain outlook for the future. So which is it? Get your story straight. On this side of the House, we have been listening to this rubbish for 120 years. It's why we exist as a political party. We were born out of shearers' demands for a livable wage from wealthy pastoralists, and nothing has changed in 120 years. The Liberals are the party of low wages. That's bad for workers and it's bad for the economy. It constrains consumption and it dampens confidence. This government has handed down a budget predicting low growth, low productivity, low workforce participation and a real wages cut. They've been in power for eight long years, and it shows. They have no plan for the country—only a plan for their own re-election. This government's incompetence is on full display every day: the economy, the vaccine rollout, aged care, Defence contracts, infrastructure rorts and the failure to create an integrity commission. Their self-styled credibility as the supposed better economic managers is in tatters. You wouldn't trust this trillion-dollar debt Treasurer with a tuckshop tin, let alone the national accounts. Their bungling has dire consequences. As I stand before you, Tasmanians are particularly feeling the pinch. We are facing myriad challenges: housing, tourism and infrastructure, just to name a few. Last month's federal budget provided no path forward for my state. There were stagnant wages and funding cuts for tourism and hospitality. The budget documents reveal real wages declining over the next two years. This is a failure of economic management. How can this government stand by and watch as workers and pensioners struggle with the rising cost of living? We have mothers skipping meals and working extra jobs to make ends meet. We have 3,800 Tasmanians on the emergency housing list. We've had 376 hospitality workers in Tasmania fleeced by their employers to the tune of $580,000 in unpaid wages. Is that the government's vision for the future of Australia? Low wages and wages theft—that's the legacy of the government, and they want more of it. They advocate for more job insecurity, more casualisation and more temporary work visas. A Labor government under the opposition leader, Anthony Albanese, will develop laws to criminalise wage theft. Labor will protect gig workers from being underpaid and end the labour hire rorts that undercut wages and conditions. Australians deserve a government that is on their side, prioritising good, secure, well-paid jobs with fair pay and conditions. These are the values that built this country. These are the values that Labor will protect. 18:29 Ms BIRD DZP Cunningham I thank the member for Corangamite for bringing this motion before the parliament. I think it is really important that we talk about the fact that the budget so recently announced included this exposure of a cut to real wages over the coming forward estimates, the four years that the budget covers. You would've missed it if you were waiting for an explanation or even an admission of that by the Treasurer when he did his budget night speech. Unsurprisingly, there wasn't an attempt by the Treasurer to draw significant attention to the fact that the budget showed that, effectively, people across our communities over the next four years are going to actually see a cut to their real wages—that is, the different between wage increases and the cost of living increases. My colleague the member for Corangamite made the point that the former finance minister had made it clear—whether he meant to do so or not I leave to others to judge—that low wages growth was a structured reaction to the economy by the Liberal government. What we hear consistently is a range of myths, and in this debate I want to take the opportunity to discuss those. I'm sure some of them were covered in the statement made previously by the member opposite. It is interesting that, of the three speakers they put up to defend this, there has been only one person brave enough to actually stand up and contribute to the debate. That might tell us something about how keen they are to defend the baked-in wage cuts in the budget. An honourable member: That's a good point. Ms BIRD DZP The first thing that's consistently said to the community is that it's all about employment. It's all about employment—of course it is! Of course jobs are critically important, but if you go to any household, whether it's a single household, a couple or a family, the thing that they will tell you is that there is nothing more demoralising than having to patch together a bunch of casual jobs to try to cover the bills that you're faced with. It is not only having a job; having a job that pays a wage that allows you to live with dignity and enables you to provide for your family is just as important to those households. That's what we have seen go backwards. If it were just about having a job, the person with three jobs should be thrilled. In actual fact, they have three jobs because wages are such that they have to have three jobs. That's not a choice. This argument that, as my colleague just outlined, it's jobs versus good wages is an absolute false dichotomy. You can have jobs growth and you can have economic development, and you are more likely to have those if you have good wages. That's the economic reality. What contributes to wages? Obviously, we have in Australia the Fair Work Commission and enterprise bargaining. These are mechanisms by which people seek a fairer share of the growth and profit that's happening in our economy. This government has taken every opportunity, when people have had submissions for wage rises, to go before the Fair Work Commission and argue against them. As my colleague just said, very often they're out there telling the public and, indeed, reporting to the parliament that times have been great, that they've handled the economy so well and that there's good growth. But then, when workers want a bit of that through a Fair Work Commission determination or enterprise bargaining, suddenly the economy has got real problems and we can't afford to do this. People need a decent wage for themselves and their families. It makes a difference in our communities. Governments can do more to contribute to that cost of living side of the equation. They can seriously address the cost of child care. They can have serious policies to address the cost of housing. These are things Labor has already put forward so that the family budget can actually provide for working parents. They would have access to affordable child care and could put a roof over their heads. The real shame is this baked-in, ongoing wages cut in a budget that has a trillion dollar debt behind it. There's no more about debt and deficit trucks going around! If it's that big, surely we can back people's wages. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER HYM There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Defence Industry 154 18:34 Mr SIMMONDS 282983 Ryan At the outset I want to thank the member for Stirling very much for raising this motion. It speaks to two important commitments of the Morrison government that we on this side of the House are committed to delivering on behalf of Australians: to keep Australia safe and to create more jobs. For anyone who just heard the Labor contribution before me, only the Labor Party provide a downside to the creation of jobs, but that is exactly what they're able to achieve. On this side of the House we are very dedicated to creating jobs for Australians without reservation, because we know that creating jobs means creating opportunity for Australian families and it means that we can achieve the economic recovery from the COVID-19 recession. The member for Stirling, of course, not only is very keen to deliver these, as all members on this side of the chamber are; he has lived it himself as part of the Defence Force. He served his country and the ADF very admirably, and we thank him very much for his service along with the other members in this place who have served their country. We are building a stronger defence industry and investing $270 billion in Australia's defence capability. We are in a rapidly-changing global environment, and the Morrison government, in this regard under the leadership of the defence minister, Minister Dutton, is significantly boosting Australia's sovereign defence capabilities and making sure that the men and women of the ADF who are dedicating their lives and professional careers to our national interest, have everything that they need to protect this country and be the best the defending force that they can be. As the member for the Ryan electorate, I am very privileged to have in my electorate the Gallipoli Barracks at Enoggera and to get to speak personally pretty regularly with the many dedicated personnel of the ADF who are based there at Enoggera. Recently I had the pleasure of visiting the barracks with both the defence minister and then also with the assistant defence minister to talk to the personnel. I also have to admit that in a moment of weakness I agreed to be put through a personal training session with Assistant Minister Hastie. It didn't end very well for me, I have to say, when I tried to keep up with Assistant Minister Hastie! It was only meant to be a 20-minute training session, so they put together a bit of a circuit, and I thought, 'Jeez, you can survive anything for 20 minutes.' I was wrong—very wrong—but I can attest to the fact that the Assistant Minister for Defence, Assistant Minister Hastie, is in pretty good form, but, more importantly, that the men and women of the ADF, particularly the ones who are based at Enoggera, are in absolute tip-top shape to serve our nation. While we continue to build our defence capability, we are also backing Australian jobs. This is the point I made at the very beginning. We're doing this wherever possible by making sure our defence contracts go to domestic suppliers. Since 23 March 2020, the Morrison government has paid over 391,000 defence invoices, valued at $26.9 billion, to Australian companies, and they are paid, importantly, earlier than the standard payment terms so that we can help these Australian small businesses to deliver jobs and deliver investments into their local communities. For electorates like ours in Ryan, with large defence bases, our commitment means that local tradies and contractors get the business to work on our bases, helping local families and stimulating our local economies, so it's not just the serving men and women of the ADF who are located at the base with their families, who, of course, contribute to the surrounding community; it is also those contractors, tradies, local businesses and others who the bases support. We know that our defence industry can only survive and, indeed, thrive with the help of our outstanding Australian businesses, and in turn our Australian businesses are helped by the government guaranteeing capability opportunities for Australian SMEs in defence contracts. It is a win-win. It is a partnership between this government, Australian small businesses and the Defence Forces. In 2019, the first-ever Boxer vehicle for the Australian Army was unveiled, and you guessed it: it was at the Gallipoli Barracks in Enoggera at the Ryan electorate. The Boxer 8x8 combat reconnaissance vehicle was officially launched under the LAND 400 phase 2 mounted combat recognisance capability project. It's a $200 billion investment for Queensland. It's something that team Queensland have fought hard for, and we look forward to continuing to see that investment and those jobs roll out into our communities going forward. 18:39 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand I must admit that I was impressed when I read this motion on the Notice Paper, not because it's yet another example of the Morrison government using defence as a political tactic—I have come to expect that from this government—it's the sheer hubris of talking about a $270 billion defence capability investment in a self-congratulatory motion when they have delivered very little except for media stunts, like sitting in a fighter jet while Kenny Loggins blares Top Gun. They spent a lot of money it seems, or so they say, but what do we have to show for it? Well, we have a very big capability gap while new kit is delayed, delayed and delayed because of this government's incompetence. Labor has been calling out this government's multibillion-dollar effective cuts to promised spending on new defence equipment. In Senate estimates this week, the defence department confirmed what Labor has been saying when the department produced figures showing $10.4 billion in cuts to defence's military equipment acquisition budget since the release of the 2016 white paper. That's not what you read in the newspapers or the media releases. There have been $2.1 billion in cuts just this year, according to the budget papers just released. That's what hubris looks like. Let's look at what we actually got for the money that has been spent. We have a potential nine-year capability gap in our submarine program while we wait and wait and wait for the new ones to be delivered. We have the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, our newest aircraft, which the marketing-man Prime Minister was recently in the jump seat of, posing for photos, with Kenny Loggins blaring. But it is flying only 64 per cent of its planned hours during 2021—more 'goose' than 'top gun'. And the list goes on. The Morrison government is there for the cringe photo ops with the big jets and the ships to make it look tough on national security in the pickies, but it's not delivering for our men and women in uniform. It's not on their side. The only side the Prime Minister is on is his own. Mr Sharma interjecting— Mr WATTS 193430 I invite the member for Wentworth to come to my electorate to see where the Williamstown shipyard used to build ships under the Labor government. It's shuttered under the coalition government. This is a shipyard that had been building ships in Australia since Ned Kelly was in a prison hulk on the port. It closed under the Morrison government. There were 1,400 jobs in defence manufacturing lost because of the incompetence of this government on defence. There's no national interest that the government won't subvert for they're own short-term domestic political interests. While the government are leaving our armed forces without the equipment that they need when they need it, they're out there beating the drums of war with China so that they'll have something to talk about at the next election. They can't talk about their record and they can't talk about their plans for the future, so they're confecting them. Our defence forces and our defence industry deserve better. The Australia people deserve better. In my portfolio, in cybersecurity, the government's approach to capability is even worse. The domestic capability of Australia's cybersecurity industry is now a crucial part of Australia's ability to defend itself, and it could be a major source of jobs in Australia's economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2020 Defence strategic update and the 2020 Force structure plan recognise the importance of cybercapabilities for Australia's defence forces. The defence mobilisation review found that, in the cyberfronts of modern unconventional warfare, many of the targets will be civilian businesses and individuals and that, similarly, the resources needed to respond will be mostly privately held. But whilst it's constantly talking about investment in sovereign defence capability, this government has no plans to develop sovereign capabilities in cybersecurity. Indeed, industry development was a significant plank in the 2016 cybersecurity strategy, developed under the member for Wentworth's predecessor, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. Unfortunately, industry development is utterly absent from the 2019 cybersecurity strategy. It doesn't appear at all. Apparently, there used to be no more exciting time to work in cybersecurity in Australia than under the former Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull. But today it is utterly forgotten about in this government. Technology is moving fast and constantly changing. That's why, to be effective, our cybersecurity capabilities need to be embedded in a diverse, interconnected and rapidly evolving private sector. Cybersecurity is an ecosystem; you can't defend a nation from cyberthreats from within silos within the defence department and the intelligence community. But there is literally no plan for industry development in cybersecurity. The former Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, invested in AustCyber, an industry development firm, in the 2016 cybersecurity strategy. Now there are zero dollars from the Commonwealth going to AustCyber and it has been forced to merge with a private sector body in order to save it. No wonder, then, that the 2021-2022 budget had lots of money for our security agencies but little money for our cybersecurity industry. If the Morrison government were serious on delivering on its national security photo ops, it would stop missing the opportunity and develop a strategic industry technology policy. (Time expired) 18:44 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I rise to support this motion on defence industry and to commend previous speakers. In particular I say to congratulations to the valiant members of the Labor Party that had to fill up the speaking list on the other side and talk positively about defence industry, which would have been tough for them! The whip is obviously owed a big favour from those opposite that had to speak to this motion given their record when it comes to defence industry in this country, particularly in my home state of South Australia. It's the home of shipbuilding, where under six years of Labor, the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd era, an era that will live in infamy, not a single capital ship was commissioned for the Navy. In six years of Labor, not a single capital ship was commissioned for the Royal Australian Navy. Thankfully, that was some time ago, but the effect of that indecision is still plaguing us today. Nonetheless, hopefully there's no prospect of a Labor government any time in the near future either and so our government can get on with our commitment to defence industry and defence capabilities through the $270 billion we are spending on capability acquisition and sustainment through the 2020s, through that 10-year period. As a member from Adelaide, I'm particularly proud of the decisions and the investments we're making in acquiring submarines and frigates for the Royal Australian Navy. The 12 attack class submarines are to be built at Osborne north shipyard and the nine frigates based on the type 26 BAE design, the Hunter class, are to be built at the Osborne south yard. The shipyard alone is an amazing engineering marvel. My good friend the member for Wentworth would agree with me, no doubt, that we have the most advanced shipyard certainly in the Southern Hemisphere and, by some measures, on the planet. It's a great thrill and pleasure any time you're out there with people from BAE who have come over from the Govan shipyards in Glasgow where they're building the type 26 for the Royal Navy and to see the salivation about the unbelievable shipyard that we have constructed through Australian naval innovation out there at Osborne south already and Osborne north for the submarine. It's something that is state of the art and is going to see us have a continuous naval shipbuilding capability and sovereign capability into the future, well beyond the attack or Hunter class programs and well beyond the lifetime of anyone in this chamber, because this is a government that is not only making decisions in the national security interests of our country but also ensuring we are achieving the industry outcome, the jobs outcome and the sovereign capability outcome. This is critically important because the history of the armed forces in this country, particularly on the naval side, has been of having excellent capability that's been acquired from somewhere else. When it comes to submarines, we're ensuring that we will have a sovereign capability to build submarines into the future. So not only are we building the 12 attack class submarines here with our partners, the French, but at the end of that program we will have a sovereign capability in this country to build our own submarines, from our own design and to our own specifications into the future. Mr Gosling interjecting— Mr STEVENS 176304 It's a $90 billion shipbuilding program that's been centred in Adelaide—the 12 submarines and the nine frigates. It is going to transform the capability of the Royal Australian Navy at a time when they desperately need an increase in their capability and their capacity to do the fantastic job that they do. The complexity of the Navy's challenge in our region is higher than it's ever been and unfortunately, into the future, that is only going to increase and become more complex. Having 12 regionally superior submarines built in Australia, built in Adelaide, is going to transform the capability of the Royal Australian Navy. We'll be doubling the submarine capability for the Royal Australian Navy as the attack class is delivered. Again, the Hunter class will completely complement that submarine capability. They're called 'Hunter' because they hunt submarines. Nine frigates will, again, be built in my home city of Adelaide to transition into the Royal Australian Navy to ultimately replace the Anzac class and other capabilities joined with the air warfare destroyers that were also built in Adelaide at the Osborne shipyard to give our Navy the capability they need to continue doing the fantastic job they already do in serving our nation and protecting our interests both domestically and abroad. Not only that but we are making sure that we are anticipating and equipping the Royal Australian Navy and our armed forces for the challenges well into the future. Defence industry is now happening here, sovereignly, in Australia. It's thanks to the decisions of the Morrison government. I'm so proud that my home state of South Australia will be such an enormous part of this $270 billion investment over the next 10 years. (Time expired) 18:49 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon My apologies for that interjection earlier, Mr Deputy Speaker. It's just a bit hard to sit here and listen to those opposite, in their eighth year, talking about 12 submarines that they're going to build, but they haven't started one yet. I just wanted to mention that. I'd like to thank the member for Stirling for bringing forward this motion. It's a good opportunity to discuss such an important issue. He has served. He's a veteran of the Australian Army. I think the member for Stirling is a good person. He's a thoughtful person. I can think of another MP over in Perth who I would love to see out of this place before the member for Stirling. Ideally the member for Stirling would be staying and someone else should be retired and should be investigated. But I digress. It is true that the government is talking about a big spend in defence industry. As I said, they haven't built a submarine yet. They don't really look that close to doing so. It's fine to talk about a big spend but what are we getting for it? When we're dealing with a pandemic, and the Australian businesses benefitting from this cash splash, I would put it that we've seen very little evidence that $270 billion is going to be spent by those opposite in a way that helps Australian players in the defence industries. There might be some crumbs of that $270 million, but what those opposite are failing to do is realise that SMEs are the backbone of our defence industry, not just back home in Darwin, in my electorate, but around the country. SMEs employ a significant number of people and create jobs through that supply chain. I think our SMEs work really well with the big players. I think that as those prime contractors get their capability and buy out smaller SMEs they end up doing most of the roles in project delivery. As they do that they involve fewer and fewer Australian SMEs. I guess that's a consequence of the nature of the market. Those opposite are pretty keen to let the market rip, especially if they're getting donations from some of these big primes. But the declared aim of any federal government should be the sovereign capability of the nation and that includes all these SMEs out there who deserve a bigger chunk of the defence industry spend. I know that our SMEs have a real commitment, because they're local people and local businesses, to sourcing things locally in a way that the prime contractors do not, because of their size and global footprint. Our local SMEs think about local supply chains. During the pandemic, where we have witnessed real disruption in trade, it's really important that we think about those supply chains and support our SMEs as much as possible. It's not only an economic imperative for our nation, but a security imperative as well. It is true that our SMEs and primes are working together in places like Tindal. There are some good local Territory companies getting work on that project, but I'd like to see it move beyond that. I want to see a situation where Australian owned prime contractors are getting some of these big jobs. There are Australian SMEs that would absolutely be able to step up if they had a federal government that was prepared to invest in them, in Australians, in jobs for Australian companies working on Australian projects. That's what's ideal. That's what's missing under this mob. The question you've got to ask is: out of that $270 billion, how much is going to Australian companies? How much is going to Australian workers working for Australian companies? There's no reason why we can't have more Australian owned primes. That's what we should be aiming for and that is what an Albanese federal Labor government will deliver. 18:54 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert I'd like to acknowledge the member for Solomon and his contribution. I agree with him that SMEs are the backbone of our defence industry and we need to do a lot more to support them. I look forward to working with him, the member for Stirling, the member for Braddon and all of our former Defence Force members in this place to empower our defence industry. I'm pretty excited to speak on this motion today, because Townsville is the largest garrison city in the nation and we are well positioned to benefit from the $270 billion investment in our nation's defence capability over the next decade. In Townsville we have upwards of 30,000 ADF personnel, veterans and their families. That is a big number in one community. They're very valued and very important, and they offer so much to our region. That's why it's important not only that we provide our defence personnel with the best equipment and capability they can possibly have but also that we support our local communities with the employment that comes from it. It's no secret, Mr Deputy Speaker, that I've been outspoken on some occasions about decisions we've made over the years, so I want to take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister for Defence and the department on the selection of the Apache helicopter to take us into the next phase of our rotary wing capabilities. We speak about the Apache helicopter as a reconnaissance helicopter. I can tell you that it is the most lethal, reliable attack helicopter on the market. That's what we need to be talking about, because this helicopter is the Harley-Davidson of the sky and it will be keeping our Defence Force safe for many years to come. At one time I made some very public comments that on the battlefield, when it's gone bad and you need air support, no-one has ever closed their eyes and wished for the underperforming Tiger. I know that the Apache had always been the digger's choice because in battle that was the only helicopter that was available, and it has proved itself time and time again. I look forward to seeing the decision paying dividends over the coming years and I will be pleading the case for the Apache to have a presence at the 5th Aviation Regiment in Townsville. It would be welcome. It has the shortest flight time from airport to having guns on target at the live fire range, so I know that the helicopter pilots would like it there. Continuing on the chopper theme, in Townsville we are home to one of the most elite rotary wing units in the nation, the 5th Aviation Regiment, and they also house the CH-47 Chinook. In Townsville we have a strong local workforce who perform critical maintenance on the Chinook under the integrated support services contract. In March this year we announced the extension of the contract by a year, increasing its total value to $89.2 million. This contract provides dozens of local jobs. It will increase the level of services provided to Defence and expand the maintenance and training support provided to the Chinook fleet. These are the workhorses of the sky. They have been used from Vietnam all the way up to Afghanistan. They are one of the cheapest aircraft that we have in the Australian Defence Force. They were invaluable during Operation Bushfire Assist, when Townsville troops were involved in the deployment. It is another example of how the defence industry is delivering for the local community in Townsville. We have early works underway, including surveying, demolition, contamination, fencing, minor track construction and repair works, and other relocation services for the Australia-Singapore Military Training Initiative. The Australia-Singapore Military Training Initiative will benefit Townsville. We'll have people located here. The Singaporeans have made Townsville their location of choice to house their maintenance facility. This is all good defence industry for Townsville. 19:00 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro It's a very tough act to follow the member for Herbert. My region is home to countless amazing, innovative organisations and industries, but perhaps one that flies under the radar to some of our communities, probably for obvious reasons, is that of the defence industry. I am lucky enough to host numerous defence industry businesses in my region. These businesses are at the cutting edge of new technology and are a great example of how regional organisations can succeed through innovation. One of those organisations is a Queanbeyan based defence innovation and technology company, Spearpoint. They have been busy creating a new digital combat helmet system for the Defence Force. It will allow our ADF personnel to maintain effortless operational communication, will have new night vision technology and will weigh considerably less than currently used helmets. The project is still in its early development, but they have already identified over 20 Australian organisations that they will be able to work with as they move towards the prototyping phase in 2022, keeping more money in Australia and continuing to support our local economies. Spearpoint is also at the cutting edge of multispectral signature management systems. The system is designed to help our soldiers stay hidden from detection and safe whilst on the battlefield. Spearpoint is progressing with a plan to bring the advanced manufacturing capabilities required to make these systems onshore, called Plan Echidna, which will further support Australian jobs. Their plan would create 70 permanent jobs in skilled manufacturing and technical specialisation during the initial stages and, subsequently, opportunities for over 350 jobs as additional knowledge is transferred from overseas to Australia. The plan is consistent with the vision for Australia's defence industry to maximise job opportunities, increase advanced manufacturing capability and establish defence exports that could support the broader Australian economy. These projects are just an example of what our regional organisations can do when given the opportunity to innovate and succeed, and I will continue to do everything I can to support jobs and innovation in our region. But we need the government to match their rhetoric here and fund Plan Echidna. My electorate has a long history of stepping up to serve our nation during times of conflict. The Men from Snowy River march is a source of pride for a high country communities and forms part of our national identity. The march left Delegate for Goulburn on 6 January 1916 with 14 members. Their aim was to go from town to town, picking up new recruits to travel to France and fight in the Great War. A crowd gathered in Delegate as these brave young men began their march, and the women of the village had sewn a large banner to accompany them on their journey. It was this banner that drew me to the Australian War Memorial in the lead-up to Anzac Day this year. These precious threads of red, white and blue are being kept safe and sound by the amazing team working at the War Memorial Annex near Ainslie. The march passed through the towns of Bombala, Nimmitabel, Cooma, Bunyan, Bredbo, Michelago, Queanbeyan, Bungendore and Tarago before reaching Goulburn—a 354-kilometre journey. Their numbers swelled from the original 14 to 144 men and boys. Tragically, of the 144 men, 39 were killed in action on the Western Front and another 75 were seriously wounded. It is only all these decades later that we are beginning to have a sense of the trauma of those who made it home. Ernest Albert Corey of Numeralla was one of the Men from Snowy River. Corporal Corey is perhaps the most decorated soldier who enlisted as part of the march. He was awarded three bars to his initial Military Medal, all for work as a stretcher bearer on the Western Front. In May 1971, Ernest Corey was interviewed at his nursing home in Queanbeyan, where he voiced pride at being awarded four gallantry awards for saving lives rather than taking them. You would be mistaken for thinking that the service, spirit and commitment evident in the Men from Snowy River was only of that time, but I see the goodness of Mr Corey and those who marched with him every day in communities right across my electorate. In these challenging times, I ask those listening to consider the contribution they can make to build on the legacy of the Men from Snowy River. 19:04 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde I would like to commend the member from Eden-Monaro for her recognition of some of those who have served our country in her electorate. I think that right across this country we all have in our electorates many men and women—including Indigenous people—who have served our nation with distinction over the past 100 years. I am very pleased to support this motion by the member for Stirling on our defence industry. I am happy to note that the government is investing some $575 billion in defence over the next decade, including $270 billion in capability. Defence is a major partner of Australian industry, offering broad opportunities to be involved with the cutting-edge technology and innovative capability which support our national and strategic interests. The government's $270 billion investment in our capability is creating jobs and opportunities for business across Australia. Our continued investment guarantees that the men and women of the Australian Defence Force receive the defence capability they need to keep Australians safe. One of the businesses in my electorate that is benefiting from this program is Holmwood Highgate, an outstanding business that creates defence capability and employment opportunities. Holmwood Highgate has grown from a simple operation on the outskirts of Brisbane in the 1950s to a globally recognised name in bulk liquid tankers. Homewood Highgate recently received $1 million from the federal government under the 2020 Sovereign Industrial Capability Priority grant program, which enabled them to enhance their ability to manufacture bulk liquid transport equipment serving the commercial, aviation and defence industries. Recently I had the pleasure of joining the CEO, Wade Mellish, and the team at Holmwood Highgate as they signed a $30 million contract with Rheinmetall MAN Military Vehicles to deliver fuel and water modules that will be fitted to the defence fleet of logistics trucks. These are a product that was entirely developed and built at Holmwood Highgate. I had the pleasure of visiting Holmwood Highgate several times over the past few months and I am delighted that Wade and his team have succeeded in securing this contract, which will support the already 150 jobs at their manufacturing facility at Loganholme. They are also looking to continue to grow that business, and one of their constraints is actually getting more welders, fitters and turners to build more of the product that they are making so well. Wade shared with me that over 80 per cent of the materials they use in manufacturing these fuel and water modules for Defence are procured within the south-east corner of Queensland, providing flow-on benefits to our local businesses. I think that is one of the things that is often not appreciated. We see the headline numbers of $30 million here and $50 million there for this, but, whilst the flow-on benefits of those programs might go to a company like Holmwood Highgate, it's the range of people in our local business community in South-East Queensland and in other parts of Australia as well who actually benefit from these programs because they are part of that supply chain to businesses like Holmwood Highgate. This is not the first time that Holmwood Highgate has secured a Defence contract. They previously secured more than $108 million worth of work supporting phase 3B of the Defence's LAND 121 program. The LAND 121 program is a multiphase project providing the ADF with current-generation and high-capability field vehicles, modules and trailers. Approximately 7½ thousand protected and unprotected vehicles, providing better field mobility, logistics support and tactical training will be procured. Holmwood Highgate's new contract will support new modules for additional trucks being delivered under the LAND 121 phase 5B part of the project. Their rugged military standard bulk water tank modules are built according to— (Time expired) 19:10 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi Anyone who has visited Wodonga knows that it's shaped by the Australian Defence Force communities in Bandiana and Bonegilla, which have been around for more than 80 years. What visitors to the region often don't know is that Indi is also home to a thriving defence capability industry that spans much further south, from Wodonga to Wangaratta and Benalla. According to a recent assessment by Regional Development Australia, the industry pumps over $185 million into the local economy each year and supports more than 5,600 jobs. Pentarch Industrial in Wangaratta, for example, provides essential defence materiel services like ammunition box refurbishment. Another great example is Scientific Management Associates in Wodonga, who deliver highly complex logistics solutions for the ADF. The success of important ADF training bases like Bandiana is heavily reliant on businesses just like these. Defence spouses are also critical to the economic success of our local defence industries and the region. Much like in many other ADF towns across the nation, there are new defence personnel and families arriving every week. According to a recent study undertaken by Defence Families of Australia, 50 per cent of defence spouses experience challenges looking for work in Wodonga; that's double the percentage seen in larger metropolitan areas. What a massive missed opportunity for local employers who are crying out for skilled workers! As the Deputy Prime Minister is wont to remind us, there are 66,000 jobs available right now in regional Australia, which is more than there were during the mining boom. Defence spouses are often highly skilled and educated, from teachers to contract administrators, accountants and health professionals. There are also excellent community builders and participators. You only have to attend an Australian Military Wives Choir recital in Wodonga or turn up to a social arts and crafts session run by the Bandiana Neighbourhood House to see the community spirit on full display. According to Business Wodonga, defence spouses often bring excellent defence industry knowledge, having lived in ADF towns right across Australia for many years. This is a tremendous asset that the government should be doing all it can to capitalise on. If the government can spend $270 billion upgrading our defence capabilities and supply chains, then surely it has the resources to invest heavily in the spouses of those who work in the sector. The new one-off $1,500 payment through the Partner Employment Assistance Program is a good first step, but we could be doing so much more. Uprooting family life every few years can be incredibly daunting and draining for young defence families. Feelings of dislocation, isolation and being an outsider are common. Networking or employer speed dating programs are often intimidating. Defence spouses are often juggling other stresses, like finding housing and enrolling children in new schools. Sadly, many recruiters put these spouses in the too-hard basket, knowing that they may have to leave a job at short notice if their partner is redeployed again. It has been great to see the local business community in Wodonga step up to the plate where the government has dropped the ball. Recently, Business Wodonga and Impressability, a career service just down the road from my Wodonga electorate office, partnered with Wodonga TAFE and defence community support groups like Soldier On to launch a unique defence spouse careers program. Running over six weeks, the program covers a whole range of important skills from cover letter writing and digital branding to strategic interviewing and networking. Business Wodonga and Impressability have gone above and beyond to make the program free, even covering any childcare costs associated with taking the course through the Bandiana Neighbourhood House. I applaud their initiative, and I invite the government to take a really good look at what communities like Wodonga are doing. The government could be pitching in so much more. It's truly time to value and invest in the economic potential our defence spouses bring to the regions. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is interrupted and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. COVID-19: International Travel 161 19:14 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I move: That this House: (1) notes: (a) Australia's borders have been closed for over a year to both inbound and outbound travel as an emergency measure; (b) the Government has not disclosed or provided any credible timeline or roadmap to reopen the borders; (c) many Australian citizens are struggling with disconnection from family members, partners and loved ones overseas and unable to see one another; (d) there has been no extension of travel exemptions to family members or visa holders despite repeated calls; (e) many Australian business sectors, like tourism, entertainment, agriculture, universities and industry are pleading for a roadmap to safely reopen the borders; and (f) communities and businesses are continually exposed to quarantine leakages and pay the price with lockdowns; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) double the capacity of national quarantine facilities using best practice purpose-built facilities such as Howard Springs; (b) prioritise expenditure to accelerate the rollout of the vaccine with a goal of achieving vaccination of at least 80 per cent of the population before the end of the year; and (c) establish a clear roadmap for safely reopening Australian borders and clearly communicate goals and timeframes by reporting back to this Parliament and the Australian people without delay. When I filed this motion last week, ahead of any announcements from Victoria, I was, sadly, obviously feeling that COVID was not done with us yet and, in fact, that the lack of long-term planning by the government was going to rear its head in yet another way. I stand here today on behalf of the people of Warringah, because they're calling for a road map for how we are going to deal in the long term with COVID. We can't have this jerking and moving along from one incident of hotel quarantine leakage to another, with the hope that somehow this is all going to be okay because bubble Australia is keeping us safe, without too much stress or pressure to vaccinate as quickly as possible, while at the same time congratulating ourselves that we're doing okay compared to the rest of the world. We need to have a discussion about Australia's long-term plans. Variants of COVID could be with us for up to four to six years. So, even on our incredibly slow rollout of the vaccine on the current schedule, we will, by the time we get to it, need to deal with variants and booster shots. So what is the long-term plan or road map that the government has for how Australia is going to go into the future with this situation? Australian borders have been closed since March 2020, as an emergency response to a growing health crisis. I stress the word 'emergency'. At the time, it was the right thing to do, but I don't think any of us believed this was a permanent or long-term solution. The borders have now been closed for over 14 months. We have the most restrictive constraints in the world when it comes to limiting the movement of our citizens, and it's important to note that a significant number of people are impacted. Our country is proud of its multicultural heritage. Twenty-nine point eight per cent of Australians were born overseas, and more than one-third in my own electorate of Warringah. Many are struggling with separation from family or partners overseas. Businesses in my electorate, particularly tourism operators, are suffering because of the lack of workers. Across the economy, sectors such as tourism, universities and agriculture are struggling because of closed borders. As we've seen with the breakout of COVID again in Melbourne, we are not done with breakouts. We absolutely must put in a long-term plan. Visa holders and dual citizens are considering leaving Australia, as the extended separation from family members is causing distress. I have asked the minister and the government to consider extending travel exemptions to family members, including parents, and to visa holders, but there's a deathly silence in terms of having a more compassionate approach. Prospective marriage visa holders have paid upwards of $10,000 for visas, and they have not been granted exemptions to join their fiances. More compassion and flexibility has to be shown, and there are solutions available. Of course, first, we need a comprehensive vaccination rollout plan. This really should be the No. 1 priority the government should be focusing on. But the next bottleneck is our quarantine. I am a strong supporter of our quarantine. I believe it is absolutely the ring fence that has kept Australia safe. But we must make it fit for purpose. We need to have federal quarantine facilities in each state, not in hotels but in fit-for-purpose facilities without shared air conditioning. This has to be done. The reality is that living with COVID is going to mean some form of quarantine for the foreseeable future, so we must invest in that capacity, because we can't have a situation where Australia is indefinitely on pause. We need to reopen, not all at once but in a gradual reopening so that sectors can survive, from travel agents to agriculture—so many areas. We have capacity to increase our quarantine. We know that the government has now agreed to extend the capacity of Howard Springs from 800 to 2,000 people, but Jane Halton's review indicated it could go to 3,000 people. We know about all of our breakouts and leaks. Hotel quarantine currently takes approximately 6,000 people nationally. We need to double or triple that capacity so that we have an opportunity for the Australian economy to recover and reopen. Young people are facing a lost decade if we continue with a complete lack of road maps and planning for the future of Australia. We need to do it safely and smartly. At the moment, it's as if the government is just ignoring the long-term issues. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Is the motion seconded? 19:19 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman I second the motion. In the dying minutes of tonight, I just want to support this motion and to give a blame-free account of what we're doing in quarantine, which means standing up for the work of state governments and recognising that, while always more can be done, there are three issues that are very germane to the motion that has been moved by the member for Warringah. The first one is that, to fix something like the uncertainty around COVID, particularly with new strains emerging, it's very hard to give a clear road map deep into the future. The only way you can make the road map slightly clearer is through more evidence and information, and with that comes science. To quote Matt Damon in my favourite movie, The Martian, this is about sciencing the heck out of this problem. I would argue there's not enough research being done in Australia, which is actually an ideal place to study the effects of hotel quarantine and the potential movement of infected cases. On 22 January we instigated antigen testing for everyone getting on a plane to come here, to make sure that we're not transporting infected returnees directly into hotel quarantine and overly stressing what the previous speaker said is already a suboptimal mechanism of quarantine. Secondly, it is absolutely the right of the opposition to push for faster rollout, but I do want to note that, as of 26 May, approaching half a million of the most vulnerable people in New South Wales and Victoria have had at least their first jab. There are 345,000 people in aged-care facilities who have already had at least one jab, if not both jabs. The utilisation of vaccines, in excess of 80 per cent, by the major states is very impressive. It is a little low in Queensland and the Northern Territory. The third point I want to make is: if you really want to know whether someone is protected, there is no test, but we can do serology. It's currently available. Rapid lateral flow immunoassays can be used to show that someone has some level of immunity, either as a result of previous infection or one or two jabs. I'm simply asking this question. I wrote about this in the middle of last year in both Fairfax and The Australian. We've got to be creative about quarantine, not be paralysed. I got that sense from the previous speaker—where's this going to head? We can raise these caps if we can prove we can do it safely. The proof is not there yet. I don't yet think that exchange through air conditioning is the biggest concern we have. Certainly in South Australia, the potentially simultaneous or near simultaneous opening of doors is leading to aerosol spread. Let's take that at face value, if that's what the CHO says. The answer is: for goodness sake, in hotel quarantine, don't put an infected person on the same floor as someone who has no antibodies and hasn't even been vaccinated. There's simple stuff to do to reduce the appalling cost Victoria is facing. It is not a political comment. It's devastating that something that happened in South Australia has had such an impact in Victoria. We have a member right here in the chamber wearing a mask as a result of what has happened. Let's start saying that, if you are going to return to Australia, and your booking is two weeks ahead, for goodness sake, go and get vaccinated. Why not turn up at the airport with serology, as evidence that your immunity is on track, that your IGG is at least there. Having antibodies to spike protein doesn't guarantee you will not be infected, but it's sure as hell better than having nothing at all. If someone has no immunity whatsoever, they are a clear and present danger, both where they are and of course on being thrown into hotel quarantine, where there might be an infected case. Let's use some common sense. Let's try and define a gold standard and let's try and achieve that. There are 23 rapid lateral flow immunoassays available. These don't cost much to do. You could simply say: 'Get them before you get on the plane. If you work in an aged-care facility, let's prove that your jab actually led to an immunogenic response.' I appreciate you can have some innate response, but we're trying to prove that there is a response to a vaccine. Marylouise McLaws has said that, after full, double vaccination, between 13 and 20 of people are not adequately protected. I think those people have a right to know if they're a reservoir of potential reinfection. We don't know whether it's going to transmit the disease. But serology is a damn good start, and it's not happening at the moment. 19:24 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara I am pleased to speak on this motion moved by the member for Warringah. I want to start by saying that, the longer this pandemic has gone on, the less responsibility the Prime Minister has taken. In the early days, the Prime Minister and the Chief Medical Officer were the ones who actually did the announcements late at night. They were the ones who did the press conferences. They were the ones who did the decision-making on the restrictions that the country would have to undergo. Then, as the pandemic evolved—obviously Victoria had a second wave, which was devastating—the Prime Minister and Chief Medical Officer backed away. They backed away from all responsibility, and they basically handed all of the responsibility over to the states and territories. All of the different states and territories had different decision-making and different rules for different circumstances. The Prime Minister and the federal government took a completely hands-off approach when it came to managing our borders and this pandemic. So the member for Warringah is 100 per cent right that we need a road map in order to get our borders open, but it has to start with the Prime Minister taking some responsibility for what goes on inside the country. It is completely unbelievable that John Howard would have allowed the states and territories to control the movement of people in this country. I just find it impossible to believe that John Howard would have completely relinquished all authority on that matter. But that's what Scott Morrison has done, because it was too politically inconvenient and difficult for him to be involved in that decision-making process. When Victoria had a case a couple of weeks ago, I was speaking to a travel agent friend of mine who has had some of the most difficult times in his business. He runs a great business, but this pandemic has been devastating for it. He said he had someone leave Melbourne before the restrictions came in. They were in Brisbane for work. Then, returning, they had eight different sets of circumstances from all of the different states and territories about what they could do next and what the border rules would mean. One state had certain rules and another state had another rule, and the territories had another rule. There is no uniformity in our border restrictions and our border controls in this country. It comes back to the fact that the central government, the Commonwealth government, the federal government, has had a completely hands-off approach to this pandemic. That's where this problem lies. If we are serious about having more robust protection against this virus, we cannot have that discussion without a serious vaccination program that has a sense of urgency, as if lives and livelihoods depended on it, because they do. We're seeing in Victoria right now the devastation from a lack of protection because of a lack of vaccination. There aren't enough people who are securely defended against this virus. I note that, over the last couple of hours in Victoria, another aged-care resident was reported to have contracted the virus. At this stage, they are asymptomatic. The good news is that they had had two vaccines, which goes to show that you can still catch the virus. But, if the difference is between catching the virus and going through a deadly second wave like the one we had in Victoria, with aged-care residents catching the virus, that's the ballgame. That's exactly what we need to focus on in order to ensure that our borders can stay open with confidence. But without a vaccination program that has urgency, without a federal government that is willing to take some of the political heat and make some of the political decisions, this is going to continue on. Of course, the other big piece of the puzzle is quarantine. The states have done an admirable job, but they are all crying out for the federal government to come to the table and to assist with it. I genuinely hope that this isn't a political issue that we have to continue prosecuting over the next few months, I genuinely hope the federal government starts vaccinating people with urgency, I genuinely hope the federal government sorts out quarantine and I genuinely hope the federal government starts to take responsibility for this pandemic, because it is only then that we'll start to see the other side of it. 19:29 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith Thank you to the member for Warringah for moving this motion. We've all been inundated with phone calls from constituents asking when the borders are going to reopen, because they have loved ones that they can't get in contact with. Unfortunately, under this government that's not going to happen for a very long time, because we can't reopen the borders until we get those vaccination levels up to safely have a population that has some sort of immunity to this terrible virus. Labor's been calling for many, many months now for the government to get quarantine and vaccination right, and the government has bungled it. This is what Labor would do: we'd build dedicated quarantine facilities such as Howard Springs across the country now; we'd fix the vaccination rollout; we'd start a mass advertising and education campaign to encourage Australians to get vaccinated; and we'd also locally manufacture mRNA vaccines. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is interrupted, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. If the member's speech was interrupted—which it was—the member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed. Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:30