2021-08-30 46 1 7 House of Reps 0 1

Monday, 30 August 2021

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

COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Petitions Committee 1 Report 1 10:01 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I present the 30th report of the Petitions Committee for the 46th Parliament. PETITIONS 1 PETITIONS Myanmar 1 Australian Broadcasting Corporation 1 PETITIONS 1 PETITIONS Responses 1 10:01 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn I present the following 12 ministerial responses to petitions previously presented: Ralan Group 1 Welfare 2 Coal Industry 2 COVID-19: Economy 2 National Gold Supply 3 Vaccination 4 Aviation Industry 5 Australian Consumer Law 5 Housing Affordability 6 Private Health Insurance 6 COVID-19: International Travel 7 Census 7 PETITIONS 8 PETITIONS Statements 8 10:01 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn Both petitions I present here today are endorsed by petitioners who have chosen to add their signature in support of the issues raised, but one petition in particular, regarding a matter of foreign diplomacy, has received considerable interest. The committee has examined the data of signatories to this petition and noted that many are from IP addresses registered to countries other than Australia. This indicates that some signatories may not be genuine citizens or residents of Australia, which is a requirement to petition. Petitioners make a self-declaration of this status when adding their signature and that is a requirement that the committee examined during its recent inquiry into petitioning security and accessibility. The committee looked at whether more robust identity verification methods should be introduced, such as the use of official records, and considered the practice of other jurisdictions with similar requirements. In the report of the inquiry the committee concluded, and I quote: Self-declaration by electronic petitions and paper petitions has proven to be the least onerous way to provide for residency checks while maintaining accessibility. The Committee continues to support the current arrangements for self-declaration of residency or citizenship. For this petition, the committee is satisfied that the balance of accessibility and a genuine intention to petition legitimately has been met. However, the committee has agreed to investigate other options for reducing false declarations on petitions. Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I look forward to further updating the House on what these options may be and on the future work of the Petitions Committee. COMMITTEES 8 COMMITTEES Indigenous Affairs Committee 8 Report 8 10:03 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa On behalf of the Standing Committee on Indigenous Affairs, I present the committee's report entitled Report on Indigenous participation in employment and business, together with the minutes of the proceedings. I start by acknowledging where we meet today has been the meeting place for the Ngunawal and Ngambri peoples for thousands of years. I pay my respects to elders past, present and future and acknowledge the cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people wherever they are in Australia. The deliberations for the report tabled today were suspended with the onset of COVID-19 so that the committee could undertake a report on food pricing and food security in remote Indigenous communities, which was presented to this House in December 2020. The committee resumed hearings for this inquiry that we table today in February this year. The inquiry received 85 submissions and conducted 19 public hearings. Unfortunately, although the committee understood the benefits of meeting interested parties on site to properly understand the nature of the challenges, travel was thrice cancelled due to border closures and travel restrictions. I would personally like to thank all the communities, business owners and Commonwealth departments who joined as participants to our hearings. Your assistance has helped inform the recommendations of this committee. Current estimates suggest that here are between 12,000 and 17,000 unique Indigenous businesses across the country. The sector is diverse, from administration through to education, health, construction and ICT. The committee heard from many successful businesses, and these are detailed in our report. Our recommendations seek to build on that success and seek to encourage opportunities for Indigenous business. We heard from many Aboriginal businesses that they were proud of their businesses and of their legacy that they were leaving for their children and grandchildren. The committee looked at Supply Nation and the support and confidence it provides. If a business or government department procures services from a listed Supply Nation business, they can be assured of the bona fides of that business. Certainly, all federal departments have met and exceeded targets for Indigenous procurement, which is why the committee has recommended a review, to build on the successes and the integrity of the scheme. The other part of the committee's work for this report centres on growing Indigenous employment pathways and opportunities. The committee found time and time again in evidence at the hearings that there were several barriers, particularly remote locations, and these affected training, supportive workplaces and long-term job opportunities. Poor transport access, even if the jobs were available, is also an issue. The committee notes the government is currently redesigning the Community Development Program, or CDP. However, what must happen with this new design is that the needs of the communities are implemented. Any implementation must have the consent and input of these communities to ensure there is change that guarantees positive outcomes for the people who are part of the program. The views of remote communities and small labour markets must be considered when these programs are set up. Clearly a one-size-fits-all approach will not be useful or accepted. It is also important to ensure that training on country is part of any changes. This will ensure that women and girls in remote communities have opportunities to secure work where they live and not have to leave country for opportunities in larger population centres. Communities should be front and centre leading the way in changes to CDP. In the time that is left for me today I would like to express my appreciation for all the work of the inquiry secretaries, Dr Kilian Perrem and Ms Jenny Adams, for their support and forbearance, particularly with the extra work needed to account for the continued changes during the pandemic. I also thank my fellow committee members for bipartisan support for this report, and I especially note the chair, Mr Julian Leeser, the member for Berowra, for his willingness to discuss and support our deliberations. I would also like to note that this may be the very last contribution by the member for Lingiari, the Hon Warren Snowdon. I therefore want to recognise his support and generosity to me personally to better understand Indigenous concerns. His mentorship, support and time for conversations is appreciated. But most of all, I want to recognise in Hansard his passion for his electorate and First Nations people as a whole. He will be missed when he retires. In accordance with standing order 39(e) the report was made a Parliamentary Paper. 10:08 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra [by video link] I acknowledge the traditional custodians of this land and pay my respects to elders past and present. I thank the member for Werriwa for presenting the report today. I want to pay tribute to her and to other committee colleagues, including the members for Newcastle, Longman, Curtin, and to the deputy chair, the member Lingiari. We will miss him in the next parliament. His generosity and knowledge and his contribution, giving as he has done all his working life to the benefit of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, are things of which he should be justly proud. One of Australia's most important economic and social policy goals is to improve the economic participation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Having a job or running a business can be life changing. Witnesses told the committee that owning a business gives people greater freedom, choice and independence. It can provide pride, a purpose, a legacy and a sense of achievement. Many of those sentiments are also true of having a job. Indigenous businesses have grown in number from 13,700 in 2011 to over 17,000 today across a very wide of industries. Some of the business success stories—like Kulbardi, an office supplies business; Voyages, a tourism company; Manapan, a furniture company; and the Eather Group, a construction and logistics firm—are profiled in the report. Indigenous businesses have an employment rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 60 per cent higher than other businesses. The government's Indigenous Procurement Policy, introduced in 2015, is playing a significant role in that growth and success. The IPP's purpose is to drive economic develop and employment. The IPP sets a target of three per cent by volume and one per cent by value of all Commonwealth procurement contracts for Indigenous businesses. The policies are $4.3 billion in contract value today. The IPP has been a great success, with many federal departments repeatedly smashing their targets by volume and value. As the IPP becomes an established part of the culture of Commonwealth agencies, it's important to ensure the policy continues to serve its purpose of driving economic development and employment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The committee has made recommendations about whether Indigenous ownership by itself should be the qualification for participation in the IPP and whether some evidence of employment and skills transfer, the use of company profits and the ability to attract work from the broader commercial marketplace should also be taken into account. The committee recognises that there are further opportunities for growth in Indigenous business through the expansion of Indigenous business hubs, more training and support around the tendering process and further increases in Indigenous business opportunities through free trade agreements and foreign direct investment. We also recommend removing legislative and other barriers that prevent Indigenous Business Australia from expanding its operations and lending to more customers. We've heard many life-changing employment success stories, like that of Woolworths deli manager Lisa Hohoi, who told the committee: I was surrounded, mentored and influenced by positive leaders at Woolworths that gave me the courage and vision of success by believing and seeing my potential that I couldn't even see in myself … They pushed me to own my success. I can now say proudly that I'm a department manager leading a diverse team with 18 team members, two of which have come out of the same pathways program for Indigenous people here at Woolworths. Unfortunately, there's still a significant gap between the employment rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and other Australians. The government has two major employment services programs: jobactive and CDP. In addition, vocational training and employment centres work with those programs to match, mentor and place longer term unemployed Indigenous jobseekers. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people make up around 10 per cent of jobseekers on jobactive and 82 per cent of participants in CDP. The government is changing its employment services policy for all Australian jobseekers, with a new employment services model to commence in July 2022 and a new remote jobs program to replace CDP in 2023. The committee have made some observations, which we believe may help feed into those new programs. The committee would like to see a national Indigenous jobactive provider and greater collaboration and integration between jobactive and VTEC, with payments ensuring there are more incentives to place people into long-term jobs. There should also be better alignment with jobactive and CDP activity requirements. There should be more community leadership in the design of activities under CDP and a focus not on welfare but on part-time work for part-time pay, given the realities of the thin labour markets in remote Australia. There should also be a focus on the development of locally generated entrepreneurial activity. We've made recommendations about the importance of training for real jobs delivered on country, transport to work and the vital importance of mentoring. A recurrent theme in evidence was the difficulty of placing jobseekers with police records. More needs to be done to better place these jobseekers and encourage employers to take them on. In examining these policies, we wanted to consider their effect on people in urban, regional and remote settings. On behalf of the committee I want to thank everyone who made submissions and gave evidence. I also want to take the opportunity to acknowledge the secretariat, and Annette McHugh, from my office, who did so much work on this report. I commend the report to the House. 10:13 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I too appreciate the opportunity to speak on the committee's report following the inquiry into Indigenous participation in employment and business. At the outset, I do want to acknowledge the work of the chair, the member for Berowra; the secretariat; and my parliamentary colleagues for their very collaborative approach to this inquiry and report. I also want to acknowledge those who made submissions and gave evidence at public hearings. Your insights and expertise have been invaluable. The committee received some 85 submissions in total and conducted 19 public inquiries, consulting with a diverse range of community groups and stakeholders. I support all 17 of the committee's recommendations but, given the limited time available today, I want to focus on just two: recommendation 12, regarding the Community Development Program, and recommendation 8, which underscores foreign trade and investment opportunities. One of the key issues identified by the committee relate to the Abbott government's punitive Community Development Program, or Welfare to Work, policy approach to unemployment in regional and remote communities. Since its inception in 2015, the CDP has had significant negative repercussions for First Nations communities across Australia, with poverty rates rising and income levels falling. Underpinned by purely punitive and discriminatory measures, CDP has torn at the fabric of remote communities, deeply affecting families and kinship networks. The harms are now well documented. As part of the committee's responsibilities it was important that we reflected on the key lessons learned from the inadequacies of the current CDP to ensure that the harms experienced by participants and communities are avoided into the future. In my view CDP is a shocking public policy failure, and recommendation 12 provides the Australian government with an opportunity to co-design a successor program that moves away from the top-down, short-term, inflexible approach of CDP and moves towards a model that is place based, flexible and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community controlled and would foster long-term social and cultural development. I want to turn to recommendation 8 of the report, which creates a new pathway to advance Indigenous economic development through trade and investment. OECD countries like Canada, the USA and New Zealand already have inclusive trade clauses within their free trade agreements, and it's time Australia caught up. That's why the committee is recommending all future free trade agreements contain Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander inclusions and make use of geographical indicators to protect Indigenous knowledge and products alongside our national interest. Just like the French winemakers from the Champagne region have exclusive rights to name and market their sparkling wine as champagne, Australia should follow their lead and protect the thousands of Indigenous botanicals that are currently at risk. The uniqueness of these botanicals comes specifically from their geography, from their location and from the cultural practices of propagation, maintenance, harvesting and uses by First Nations people, so it makes sense to include them in a list of geographical indicators for protection. Likewise the committee recommends that the Australian government support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander access to foreign direct investment. This additional and significant source of money could be injected into investment-ready Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander enterprises. In closing I also want to acknowledge the work of June Oscar AO in her landmark report Wiyi yani u thangani—women's voices: securing our rights, securing our future, which lays out what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women and girls consider to be their key strengths and concerns and considers what principles they think ought to be enshrined in the design of policies, programs and services and what measures they recommend ought to be taken to effectively promote the enjoyment of their human rights into the future. The chapters on learning and education, on pathways of employment and empowerment and on economic participation are especially relevant and should help shape the government's thinking on how to improve the economic participation of First Nations people. Now is the time for government to forge genuine partnerships to better support the health, wellbeing and economic aspirations of First Nations people wherever they live. On that note I commend the committee's Report on Indigenous participation in employment and business to the House. 10:18 Mr SNOWDON IJ4 Lingiari [by video link] It's a pleasure for me to speak in this debate on this report. I acknowledge the traditional owners on whose country I'm speaking, the Larrakia people of the Northern Territory. I acknowledge the contributions already made by the chair, Julian Leeser, the member for Berowra, and the members for Newcastle and Werriwa and thank them for their friendship and collaboration during the time that we've been doing this report along with the other members of the committee. I take this opportunity to also thank the secretariat for their massive contribution. As the member for Werriwa implied, this may well be the last time I get to stand up in this chamber—in my case, sit down!—and make a contribution on the tabling of a report from this committee. I do want to make a couple of observations. This committee, as long as I've been involved in it, has always worked in a collaborative and bipartisan manner. I want to thank the chair for his friendship and leadership and emphasise to the parliament that it is possible to get an agreement around very contentious issues if you've got a mind to do so. We have in this case done exactly that. This committee's report traverses a whole range of very important areas of public policy, which have been outlined by the member for Berowra, the member for Newcastle and the member for Werriwa, and I don't intend to traverse the content of the report or its recommendations. It's safe to say that these reports are important, but, sadly, they are not often enough taken up by governments. I say to the government: this report provides you with a pathway; this report provides you with an opportunity to do something different in relation to promoting Indigenous business and employment opportunities, particularly for those people who live in rural and remote parts of this country. As you would know, Mr Speaker, that's a passion of mine and always has been, but we need to understand the difference in diversity that exists across our First Nations peoples across this great nation of ours and appreciate that we might need different responses in different places. That's why the reforms proposed by this report, the recommendations made in relation to CDP, are so dreadfully important. I don't intend to take up any more of your time, but I do want to again thank all of the members of the committee. I particularly thank the member for Berowra and the member for Werriwa for their kind words about my participation on this committee. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 12 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Postponement 12 10:22 The SPEAKER 00APG I inform the House that pursuant to standing order 110 the honourable member for Hughes has postponed notice No. 1 standing in his name. The order of precedence for remaining private members' business notices as determined by the Selection Committee's report adopted by the House on 25 August 2021 remains unchanged. I will say to the member for Hughes, who's here for the next item: in putting forward a private member's bill, the committee has no choice but to give that precedence. In not proceeding with it today, as you've done, that's denied two other members the opportunity to speak on other matters the Selection Committee could have dealt with. For the fairness of members, I need to point that out. I won't take up any more time on that. BILLS 12 BILLS No Requirement for Medical Treatment (Including Experimental Injections) Without Consent (Implementing Article 6 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights) Bill 2021 12

No Requirement for Medical Treatment (Including Experimental Injections) Without Consent (Implementing Article 6 of the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights) Bill 2021

First Reading 12 Second Reading 12 10:24 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Firstly, I'd like to thank Carston, the truck driver who drove me to Parliament House this morning. God bless the truck drivers of Australia. I dedicate this bill to them. Fifty-eight years ago, when I was born, I won one of the greatest lotteries in life because I was born in the free and democratic nation of Australia. I was bestowed, as my birthright, as an Australian, freedoms and liberties that have only ever been enjoyed by a small percentage of people throughout human history. Those freedoms that were my birthright did not come for free. They were fought for and won in places with names such as Beersheba, Fromelles, Pozieres, Bullecourt, the Coral Sea, Tobruk, Kapyong, Long Tan and thousands of others. As politicians, we are reminded every single day when we come to this place. We look out the main entrance and we see in perfect alignment across Old Parliament House, across Lake Burley Griffin, up Anzac Parade and to the War Memorial. It's a reminder that the freedoms and liberties that we enjoy have been won by the sacrifices of over 100,000 Australians who have given their lives in war to protect and safeguard those freedoms. One of the great things about our nation is that we have extended those freedoms to others that have come across the seas. So when someone is a new migrant and decides to take an oath of citizenship and declare their allegiance to our country, they obtain the same birthrights that I have as an Australian—the same freedoms and liberties. As a nation, we work hard to bring those same freedoms and liberties that are the birthrights of every single Australian to others around the world. We participate in and we sign and commit to international treaties such as the Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights. Article 6.1 of this treaty, to which Australia is a signatory, provides: Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice. That is what we as a nation have signed up to in an international treaty, yet we find here in 2021 that the freedoms and the birthrights of Australians have been stolen—stolen mostly by unelected bureaucrats and cowardly politicians that are violating human rights and that are violating the principles of the Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights. Let's be absolutely clear about this: New South Wales Premier Berejiklian and health minister Hazzard, with New South Wales parliament suspended, are engaging in conduct which is a violation and abuse of human rights. The coercion and the bullying of Australians to undergo any type of medical intervention is a violation of human rights in a violation of the principles of Australia's international human rights obligations. Domestic passports are a violation of human rights, and yet we stand here in this parliament today with medical apartheid being enforced across the nation. 'Submit or you will never get your freedoms back. You will be excluded from society, denied the freedom to travel, denied access to our beaches, denied access to our national parks.' This should outrage every single one of us. 'Also, you'll be prevented from opening your business. We will deny you the freedom to earn a living. You will lose your job. You will lose your family home, unless you submit to taking a medical intervention.' This is something that we have fought against. This is something against the Anzac spirit. What is wrong with you people? And this is from a party in New South Wales that on their website boasts that they supposedly believe 'in the inalienable rights and freedoms of all people'? What a fraud! This statement is a fraud upon the electorate of Australia, a betrayal of Liberal Party values and a betrayal of everything it means to be an Australian. Shame on you, Berejiklian. Shame on you, Hazzard. Shame on you, Palaszczuk, Shame on you, Andrews. Shame on the lot of you. When you use threats of inflicting disadvantage or inflicting prejudice on Australians because they don't submit to your demands for medical intervention, you are engaging in abuses of human rights. History will condemn you for eternity as violators of human rights. Shame on every member of this House that cowardly hides under their desk and refuses to speak up to defend the freedoms and liberties of Australians. Some may argue it's okay to abuse human rights in these circumstances. That appears to be the formal position of the Liberal Party, the Labor Party, the Nationals and the Greens. Firstly, this position relies on the Doherty modelling; however, this modelling is fundamentally flawed. It uses assumptions that are both out of date and erroneous. Just look at the data out of Israel, and it will show you that the Doherty modelling's assumptions are dodgy at the best. Remember, we're not just talking about any old medical intervention; we are talking about a medical intervention that has zero long-term safety data. If you don't believe me, I will quote directly from the TGA's recent report, dated July 2021. I go to page 30 of 37. It talks about Pfizer's application, and it says: … the submitted data have the following limitations: The long-term efficacy and safety is not known. But it's even worse than that. It goes on. They admit here: The VE— which is the vaccine efficacy— against variants of concern— which of course would be delta— has not been assessed. These are the TGA's own documents. This means it hasn't been assessed against delta, and we have no idea what the long-term safety data is. And yet we are mandating this upon millions of Australians and forcing them with the threat that they will lose their jobs, they'll be unable to put food on the table for their family and they won't be able to pay their mortgage. What is wrong with you people? Seriously! It even gets worse. Therefore, the purpose of this bill is to incorporate the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights into Australian law, to hold those that violate and abuse human rights to account and to bring them to justice. I commend this bill to the House, and I call on the government to urgently bring it up for debate and for a vote and let history record where every member of this parliament sits on this issue. The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? Mr Christensen 230485 The motion is seconded. Debate adjourned. MOTIONS 13 MOTIONS Australian Flag 13 10:34 Mr CONNELLY 282984 Stirling I move: That this House: (1) recognises and celebrates the 120th anniversary of the Australian national flag which occurs on 3 September 2021; (2) honours the ideals for which our national flag stands including our history, geography and unity as a federated nation; (3) notes that this is the world's only national flag ever to fly over one entire continent; (4) acknowledges that our flag has been Australia's pre-eminent national symbol in times of adversity and war, peacetime and prosperity; (5) further recognises that our flag now belongs to the Australian people and has been an integral part of the expression of our national pride; and (6) expresses its respect for the Australian national flag as a symbol of our profound achievements as a federation, our independence and freedom as a people, and our optimism for a common future together. Later this week our nation, right across our wide brown land, will celebrate the 120th anniversary of the date that our Australian National Flag was first flown, on 3 September 1901, above the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne, and for more than a century now our flag has been flying high, symbolising our pride and our national unity. However, it wasn't until 1996 that the then Governor-General proclaimed the first Australian National Flag Day. This year marks 25 years since that point and, again, we are getting prepared to celebrate our National Flag Day. It also gives us cause to reflect on the foundations of our federation. In doing so, I spent some time over the weekend reflecting on some of the papers of the Australasian constitutional conventions of the 1890s, which was made particularly easy, given the fact that we are in lockdown in Canberra. Blissfully, they're easily available on the parliamentary website. They paint a really fascinating picture. We see in those papers that, as I said, these conventions went throughout the 1890s. They were filled with passionate politicians who ended up being, obviously, some of the earliest leaders in our national parliament. In the papers, there's talk of telegrams, insults and division. In some ways we see many of those elements here still in the parliament, except that, rather than telegrams, we have Twitter. But the point here is that there was really passionate debate about trying to get our starting constitution as good as it could possibly be. It did take a decade get there, but it continues to serve us really well at this point in time. Above this building is Canberra's most iconic landmark. We see the Australian National Flag, which is the size of a double-decker bus, flying up there. Its apex is at the centre of Parliament House. It marks the intersection of the lawmaking axis, with the House of Representatives and the Senate both adjacent to the centre of the building. This provides us with a powerful symbol of Australia, representing our distinctive national identity. Like all flags around the world, the role of our flag is to help unify our nation, and it belongs to all citizens equally. It's also an opportunity for us to reflect on the meaning, the history and the heritage of flag itself. Our first Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. Sir Edmund Barton, back in 1901 launched a competition to design the new flag for the Commonwealth of Australia. There were 33,000 submissions. The winning five were almost identical, so they shared in the 200 pound prize money. The winning designs, as we know, symbolise our history, geography and unity. The Union Jack in the upper left corner represents the history of British settlement. Below it, the Federation star and its seven points represent the unity of the six states and territories. Finally, the constellation of the Southern Cross, five stars that can be seen only from the Southern Hemisphere, is a reminder of our geography. The five stars of the Southern Cross are also significant in Indigenous legends and remind us of our rich and precious Aboriginal and Torres Strait heritage. I also recognise the other official Australian flags, including the Australian Aboriginal Flag, the Torres Strait Islander Flag and the ensigns of the Australian Defence Force. Indeed, our flag has seen us through some of our most challenging times and some of our most significant. It's the national symbol under which we fought during wars, the ensign we fly at half-mast when commemorating Anzac Day and the emblem we wear on our shoulders when undertaking military operations. I, along with quite a number of members in this House—I think we are approaching about platoon strength now—have deployed in many places around the world, both on operations and training activities, and have very proudly represented Australia and our national interests. We have also just seen the Olympians and we are now seeing our Paralympians very proudly wearing our flag as a symbol of hope for our common future of continued independence, freedom and democracy. The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? Mr Andrews HK5 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 10:40 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara [by video link] I can see that there are a few Carlton supporters in the chamber. None of us now have a bit of extra time in September—we usually do at this time of the year! Anyway, I'm pleased to talk about the motion put forward by the member today, and to talk about our flags, because I have a few things to say about our flags. First of all, the Australian flag flies proudly on top of Australia's Parliament House. I see with delight the schoolkids driving into Parliament House, seeing this national monument and seeing our flag—our country's flag—flying on top the building which, frankly, I wish I was in right now. I know that not only the state of the building but the state of the country right now is a difficult one and that there are many challenges which face our country. But, to be honest, I would take a different position to that of the previous member speaking, in saying that our flags and the state of the flags in this country actually require some reform and updating. First of all, we have three official flags: obviously, the Australian flag is one of them, along with the Aboriginal Flag and the Torres Strait Islander Flag. Of course I acknowledge the Defence Force ensigns as well. But in terms of our three official flags: the protocol at the moment is that our Australian flag must take prominence and precedence over the other two flags. It must take precedence over our Aboriginal and our Torres Strait Islander flags. In fact, when displaying them in any official circumstance, the Australian flag must be higher than the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags. At the moment, we cannot even have the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags displayed in our houses of parliament, in either the House of Representatives or the Senate. Frankly I don't think that's how it should be. I think that we have three official flags and that when displaying our three flags we should treat them equally, with equal respect and equal dignity. That means they should be flown equally and that no one flag takes prominence over the other. And, in respect to our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in this country, I would like to see the flags, when displayed in Parliament House, or in schools or in other official capacities, flown equally, respectfully and side by side to represent the different parts of our country. Obviously, I understand that there's a need for a single flag to be the one that designates our country, and I think that for the moment the Australian flag is one that we all have a fondness for. But that doesn't mean that we should accept the status quo, and it certainly doesn't mean that in certain circumstances—especially in our nation's parliament—and especially in the House where all members are treated equally and where all members of this nation are treated equally, with equal respect, dignity and speaking time—we wouldn't have an arrangement where our flags are given that same level of respect, dignity and equality. So I say that we should have the Aboriginal flag flown proudly in the House of Representatives and I say that we should have the Torres Strait Islander flag flown proudly in the House of Representatives. I do note that there was a proposal last year in the Senate, moved during NAIDOC Week by Senators McCarthy, Dodson and Thorpe, that both the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags be flown in the Senate. I think it is a great shame that the government decided to vote that down. I think this will be a reform that our houses of parliament adopt at some point, and I think the government chose to be on the wrong side of history in that particular debate. I would say to you, Mr Speaker, and to those members debating this that we all hope that our country recovers. But I would say in regard to this debate that we have three flags of equal importance, of equal part of our history, and they should be treated equally by this nation. 10:45 Mr ANDREWS HK5 Menzies I have pleasure in speaking to this motion moved by the honourable member for Stirling, coming as it does to mark the 120th anniversary of the first flying of the Australian flag on the exhibition buildings in Melbourne, where the Australian parliament sat from 1901 until the Old Parliament House was built here in Canberra, on the 25th anniversary of the proclamation of 3 September as Australian National Flag Day. One of the more pleasant duties I have as a member of parliament—at least in the time prior to COVID—is to present an Australian flag to various organisations within my electorate—often primary schools but also aged-care homes, service clubs and a variety of others, including more recently kindergartens and childcare centres. Just a few months ago I was able to present a flag to one of the childcare centres in my electorate. I was amazed at the knowledge that these four-year-olds had about the Australian flag. In presenting the flag, I usually get the children to hold up the flag and then I ask them questions about what it means. I have found—and I find this regularly—that young children, including those in preschool but particularly those in primary school, know a great deal about the Australian flag. The Australian flag represents three things, in a sense: our heritage, our place as the great southern land and our federation. Our heritage is represented in the Union Jack, itself a combination of the flags of England, Scotland and Ireland—the cross of St George, the cross of St Andrew and the cross of St Patrick brought together in an amalgamation which goes back to 1606 to form the Union Jack. That was made official by royal proclamation in 1801. As I said, it represents our heritage in that it represents the European establishment here in Australia following the discoveries of the early explorers with Captain James Cook and then the settlement with Captain Arthur Phillip. Secondly, the flag represents our place as the great southern land, the great southern continent of the Southern Hemisphere. That is represented by the constellation of the Southern Cross, which can be seen only in the Southern Hemisphere, not in the Northern Hemisphere, of this globe. Thirdly, the flag represents our federation, because that large Commonwealth star which is placed on the flag below the Union Jack represents the coming together of the former colonies in the Federation and the formation of the Commonwealth of Australia. As I said, I find that primary school students often know all these things when I ask them about the flag. It shows a degree of knowledge and indeed a degree of pride in the Australian flag—and of course we should have that pride in the Australian flag. Each Australia Day, when I present local community Australia Day awards, I present to one of the organisations in my electorate a flag which is flown here in this chamber, which you present, Mr Speaker, as Speaker, to each member of parliament to provide to community organisations. I continue to be amazed, when I nominate an organisation each year to come and receive the Australian flag on Australia Day—one that is flown here, with an appropriate certificate to indicate that—by how much pride there is by those organisations in the flag. This is a flag which has marked our times of mourning and our times of celebration. As we recall the terrible events of the last few days in Afghanistan, we can also recall that our flag has been proudly taken into battle and places of conflict on the tunics and uniforms of the Australian defence forces. It's the same flag which draped the coffins of those 41 brave Australians who lost their lives in Afghanistan, and other Australians in other conflicts around the world over the decades. It's the flag which is flown at half-mast on Anzac Day, Remembrance Day and other days of national military significance. But it's also the flag of celebration. It's the flag that we see raised above the Paralympics; the flag we saw raised above the Olympics. The Australian flag: a flag for all of us which is used, as I said, on times of mourning and times of celebration. It's our national flag; may it continue to be so. 10:50 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton [by video link] I'm pleased to speak on the motion moved by the member for Stirling. National Flag Day is 3 September, marking the day the Australian national flag flew for the first time in 1901, and it will be 120 years since then this September. Before 1901 there was no national flag—in fact, arguably, before 1901 there was no nation of Australia. In that year, 1901, the six British colonies, New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, united to form the Commonwealth of Australia, and that's when we became this wonderful federated nation that we are today. It's interesting, in 2021, to look back at why the six colonies wanted to join together as a nation. We know that there are differences. Why didn't each colony just continue with their own governments, laws, defence forces, stamps, tariffs et cetera? The drive towards federation started in the late 1800s. Obviously there were practical difficulties associated with having six colonies—things that haven't gone away. Movement of goods between the colonies was complicated, as the colonies all had different rail gauges and each colony charged tariffs for goods moving across their borders. Each colony had its own defence force, but none would have been capable on their own of defending the colonies. They still relied on the British navy to protect the coastline. In 1899, soldiers from each of the colonies served together as Australians in the Boer War. But defence of Australia was just one of the pivotal reasons for forming the federation. But that federation didn't happen overnight. In 1889, Sir Henry Parkes called for a great national government for all Australians. In 1891, delegates met for the first National Australasian Convention in Sydney. The convention spent five weeks debating and writing a draft constitution. Every aspect of the constitution was thoroughly considered. A version of this draft eventually became the Australian Constitution that we follow today. One of the key features of the draft constitution was that the federal parliament would have responsibility for areas that affected the whole nation, such as trade, defence, immigration, postal and telegraphic services, marriage and divorce. And do you know what else made its way into the Constitution as a responsibility of the new federal government because of its effect on the whole nation? Quarantine. After a series of referendums in the colonies for the people to agree to federation, on 1 January 1901 Australia became a nation. A public competition was held to find a design for the Australian national flag, and the winner was announced on 3 September 1901. Some small changes were made to the flag in the years after 1901, but the flag has basically remained unchanged since 1908. The design itself is still important. The Commonwealth star has seven points, with six representing the six colonies that I mentioned and the seventh representing all of the territories. The Southern Cross is symbolic of our unique place in the world. The three crosses on the flag, the crosses of Saint George, Saint Andrew and Saint Patrick, represent the principles our nation was founded on: parliamentary democracy, the rule of law, freedom of speech, the rights and responsibilities of the citizens and that connection back to the UK. At the recent Olympics in Tokyo, we watched as Australian flag-bearers Patty Mills and Cate Campbell proudly displayed our national flag in the opening ceremony. When our athletes were presented with medals on the podium, it was our national flag that flew proudly overhead on so many occasions. It may not have been intended when the flag was designed, but the inclusion of the Southern Cross has particular significance to First Nations people. The first people of earth to see the constellation of stars we call the Southern Cross were Indigenous Australians, First Nations people. The late Indigenous poet Kath Walker, who grew up on Stradbroke Island, not far from Brisbane, has told of knowing the Southern Cross as Mirrabooka. Mirrabooka was given spirit form to guard his people. He was placed in the sky to look over the people he loved. I love that story and I love that Mirrabooka is now part of the Australian national flag, because our flag should be a source of pride for everyone. You can badge yourself with the Australian national flag and you can wrap yourself up in it, but it means nothing unless you are living the ideals that it represents. You can stand in front of the national flag and make announcement after announcement that impacts on all Australians, but the flag won't change the impact of those announcements. It won't make untruths true and it won't make spin reality. The SPEAKER 00APG Before I call the next speaker—I don't often commend the member for Moreton, but I commend him on the background that he has there. That is the ideal background for members remoting in. 10:55 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney [by video link] I'm proud to have North Sydney Oval as my background today. Just over a month ago, so many millions of Australians shared the common experience late at night of watching the opening of the Tokyo Olympics. The two weeks of Olympic sporting competition and Australia's incredible success were for many the bright spot during COVID lockdowns. At the opening ceremony and at so many medal presentations that followed, we were united in pride when we saw the best of our athletes represent our nation under the Australian flag. When Patty Mills and Cate Campbell walked into the Olympic stadium, we saw our flag in their hands and we let out a collective cheer. We did so again last week when Danni Di Toro and Ryley Batt held our flag at the opening ceremony of the Paralympics. For 120 years that flag has been there above and with Australians at the best of times and during the worst—during the triumphs of our achievements and the horrors of the military battlefield. It flies over this parliament on that great flagpole that is the apex of our national democracy. I want to thank the member for Stirling for bringing this motion to the House so we can properly acknowledge the 120th anniversary of that moment our flag was first unfurled by Sir Edmund Barton to fly over the Royal Exhibition Building in Melbourne on 3 September 1901. The path to Federation and Australian nationhood was a singularly great achievement for the Australians of that time. We were a nation not born from conflict or revolutionary wars but instead created by the best of democratic ideals and processes. It was to be a similar process with the design of the Australian flag, created as it was through an international design competition that attracted almost 33,000 entries. The award for the winning design was to be shared by five people. It represented the egalitarianism of the new Commonwealth. Ivor Evans was a 14-year-old schoolboy from Melbourne; Leslie John Hawkins, a teenage apprentice to a Sydney optician; Egbert John Nuttall, a Melbourne architect; and Annie Dorrington, an artist from Perth. Even a Kiwi was in the mix: William Stevens, a ship's officer from Auckland, New Zealand. For their efforts, the winners shared in a 200-pound prize pool, including money donated by a tobacco company, something we'd probably best to try to forget today. It was a princely sum for the time. Two years after its first display, King Edward VII formally approved the design for the flag of the Commonwealth of Australia, and in 1953 the Menzies government enacted the Flags Act, which confirmed the blue ensign as our national flag. In 1996, Australian National Flag Day was formally proclaimed by the Governor-General, and it has been celebrated ever since on 3 September. Sadly, COVID-19 restrictions will mean that many of the celebrations that otherwise would have been held this week have been moved to different platforms. As an ambassador for Australian Flag Day, I've been looking forward to emceeing the commemorations plan for Martin Place in Sydney, but this is not to be. Nonetheless, this coming Friday is an important occasion to reflect on the history and the enduring symbolism of our flag. I've long supported the flag in its current form; in fact, one of my first television experiences was participating in an A Current Affair debate on the future of the flag, hosted by the legendary Jana Wendt, between the then president of Young Labor and me in my role as Young Liberals president. Our flag reflects who and where we are as a nation. The Southern Cross represents our geography, as the most notable constellation of the southern skies. Its importance spans tens of thousands of years for Indigenous Australians, as it has in more recent times for nations of the Southern Hemisphere like New Zealand and our own. The Commonwealth star represents our federation with its representation of our six states and our territories. The Union Jack in recent times has become perhaps the most contested element of the flag. In 1901 its presence would have been relatively uncontroversial, such was our allegiance to Britain at the time. Since then, its significance has evolved. I see its presence not just as a reminder of our history; more importantly, it is an enduring reminder that, while our Constitution was shaped by the democratic forms of many nations, including the structure of institutions in the United States, it is the liberal democratic ideals of the Westminster system that have guided our own development as a nation. Symbols do matter, and Australians are proud of the Australian flag. So this Friday I hope all of us will pause to remember the incredible 120-year history of our flag and all that it has represented and continues to represent about our incredible nation. 11:01 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley In today's debate in the House, we are recognising and celebrating the centenary of the Australian national flag—the 120th anniversary that occurs this Friday, 3 September. We honour the ideals for which our national flag stands, including our history, geography and unity as a federated nation, and we note that this is the world's only national flag to ever fly over one entire continent. We acknowledge that our flag has been Australia's pre-eminent national symbol in times of adversity, war, peacetime and prosperity. We further recognise that our flag now belongs to the Australian people and has been an integral part of the expression of our national pride. We express our respect for the Australian national flag as a symbol of our profound achievements as a federation, of our independence and freedom as a people, and of our optimism for a common future together. Who would have thought, when the 32,823 entrants, the men, women and children at the time, in 1900-1901, who helped design our flag, that they would see our society and our nation as it is today? Sir Edmund Barton announced the five winning entrants: Ivor Evans, Leslie Hawkins, Egbert John Nuttall, William Stevens and, the only woman to win, Annie Dorrington. I can only imagine what they would think of this building, this chamber and what we're discussing today when they sat down with their ink and paper to look at how Australia would be and what we would become. Two hundred pounds, the prize money, was a lot of money back then, and it had to be shared by the five of them. But it was a lot of money going into a very significant moment of our history. The Australian flag is special, and it represents our country's values, its diverse people, its triumphs and its challenges throughout history. I want to focus in my remarks today on the flags that fly in this building and this parliament that I am standing in. We all know that as members we have the honour of being presented with these flags, a special occasion that occurs, by the Speaker. I had the opportunity to present one of these flags, which flew for the first time in this place on 15 August 2015—my parents' wedding anniversary—to Colonel Mark Smith, who was serving in Afghanistan. He proudly flew that flag in Afghanistan. I remember entering this chamber for the first time and being sworn in, which was exactly five years ago today, 30 August—the member for Fisher, the member for Tangney, the member for Goldstein and I—and I remember looking at those flags and being in awe of what they represented, and how I was part of that story as well. So I presented that flag, and it flew at Camp Qargha. I was so pleased that it was to a member of our ADF who was serving at the time, and I've reflected on that interaction specifically over the past few weeks. That flag was flown on Anzac Day in 2020 at Camp Qargha. The member for Fisher and I had the privilege of visiting Afghanistan in 2017. Then, that flag continued its journey where I presented it to St Joseph's Primary School at Corinda. I encouraged the students at that important ceremony to think of Colonel Smith, who is a father at that school, and all the service people like him who exemplify our proud Australian values of courage, mateship and selflessness. Our values and our freedom are hard-won through the sacrifices of those who chose to serve our country, like my father, the late Allan Baxter Dick, who served under that flag in World War II. Our flag represents not only their sacrifice but the millions of diverse Australians who everyday benefit from their protection. I'm proud to support this motion today, but I'm also proud to support our nation's flag. 11:05 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra [by video link] I'm delighted to speak today about the history and importance of the Australian national flag. The Australian national flag was designed and adopted as a result of a public competition over 120 years ago. It wasn't created by politicians and bureaucrats but by Australians themselves. The competition received 32,823 entries, with the winning design being won by five almost identical entries. Each of the five winners shared in 200 pounds of prize money—that's almost $30,000 today. The joint winners were Annie Dorrington, a well-known artist from Perth; Ivor Evans, a 14-year-old Melbourne schoolboy whose father owned a flag-making business; Lesley Hawkins, an 18-year-old from Leichhardt who was apprenticed to a Sydney optician; Eggbert Nutall, an architect with the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works; and William Stevens, a first officer with the Union Steamship Company of New Zealand. When you think about the diversity of that group—different ages, different occupations, living in different parts of Australia and even New Zealand—it underscores the point that our flag belongs to all of us. As the former Governor-General Sir Peter Cosgrove said: Ultimately, our flag serves as a potent symbol of our nation. One nation, of many backgrounds, but ultimately united together by shared values and ideals and a respect for each other and the diversity that is the very essence of who we are. The Australian national flag has three elements on a blue background: the Union Jack, the Commonwealth star and the Southern Cross. The Union Jack in the upper left corner represents the history and contribution of Britain to Australia. Our law, our language, our freedoms, our culture and many of our social norms are part of our British inheritance. Below the Union Jack is the white Commonwealth or Federation star. It has seven points representing the unity of the six states and the seventh, added in 1908, represents the territories of the Commonwealth. The star is also featured on the Commonwealth Coat of Arms. The Southern Cross is shown on the flag in white. It's a constellation of five stars that can only be seen from the Southern Hemisphere and is a reminder of Australia's geography. The flag was flown for the first time on 3 September 1901 at the Exhibition Building in Melbourne. On that day, Prime Minister Edmund Barton announced the winners of the competition. A large flag, 5.5 metres by 11 metres, was flown over the dome at the building. Each year Australia marks National Flag Day on 3 September. This year is the flag's 120th birthday. In February 1903, King Edward VII officially approved the design for the official Australian flag and the Australian red ensign for Australia's merchant ships and private pleasure craft. It's a flag that we've carried into battle. It's a flag raised at moments of remembrance like Anzac Day and a flag raised at moments of celebration like the Olympics and Paralympics. I was moved earlier this year when I saw the damage the floods on the Hawkesbury River had created. Those floods destroyed the St George caravan park at Lower Portland in my electorate. But among the debris was a solitary Australian flag, tattered but still flying, a beacon of hope at a time of tragedy. An amendment to the Flags Act was introduced by the Howard government and passed in 1998 to ensure that the Australian national flag could only be changed with the agreement of the Australian people at a referendum. This was to protect the flag from the designs of Ausflag and some members of the Labor Party who wanted to see the flag changed. I believe our flag should never be changed. The Australian National Flag Association was formed in 1983 to promote our flag and educate people about it, and I note that their longtime office bearer John Christian Vaughan was recently awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia at the Queen's Birthday awards. Australian National Flag Day is an opportunity for people to celebrate with pride the anniversary of our flag. I encourage people in my electorate and across Australia to fly or display the Australian national flag every day, but particularly this Friday, to show pride in Australia, its history, its institutions and to celebrate the 120th birthday of our amazing flag. I want to finish my remarks with a poem by Robert Northover, written in 1986, called Our Flag: Our Flag wears the stars that blaze at night, In our Southern skies of blue, And a little old flag in the corner, That's part of our heritage too. It's for the English, the Scots and the Irish, Who were sent to the ends of the earth, The rogues and schemers, the doers and dreamers, Who gave modern Australia its birth. And you, who are shouting to change it, You don't seem to understand, It's the flag of our laws and our language, Not the flag of a faraway land. Though there are plenty of people who'll tell you, How when Europe was plunged into night, That little old flag in the corner, Was their symbol of freedom and light. It doesn't mean we owe allegiance, To a forgotten imperial dream, We've the stars to show where we're going, And the old flag to show where we've been. It's only an old piece of bunting, It's only an old piece of rag, But there are thousands who've died for its honour, And shed of their blood for OUR FLAG. I particularly want to acknowledge the contributions of others who have spoken in this debate, in particular the very good speech by my friend the member for North Sydney, who reminded us that the Southern Cross doesn't just remind us of our own geography but has particular resonance for the Indigenous Australians as well. As the chair of the House Indigenous affairs committee I also want to elevate that point. Thank you. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The time allotted for this debate has now expired and the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. National Police Remembrance Day 19 11:11 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler I move: That this House: (1) notes that National Police Remembrance Day will be observed on 29 September 2021; (2) acknowledges the crucial role police officers across Australia play in our local communities and the tremendous risk and sacrifice that comes with their duty; (3) honours the lives and memories of those police officers who have made the ultimate sacrifice in the course of their duty and specifically this year honours, Senior Constable David Masters of the Queensland Police Service, who was killed while trying to intercept a stolen vehicle; (4) pays tribute to the families and friends of police officers who have been killed in the line of duty throughout our nation's history; (5) commends the valuable work of Police Legacy, who look after the loved ones of police officers who have fallen; and (6) reaffirms its support for the nation's police officers and honours their courage, commitment and dedication in ensuring the peace and safety of our communities. National Police Remembrance Day is observed on 29 September, the day of Saint Michael, the patron saint of all who defend against wrongdoing. This is one of the most significant days in the national police calendar. As a nation, we pause to remember the police officers who have lost their lives in the execution of their duty. We honour their courage and the commitment and the dedication of all police members who have sworn to protect our communities. Policing comes with a high degree of risk that thankfully most of us will never have to encounter. It takes a special type of person, I believe, with a special type of courage to wear the police uniform. We are forever indebted to those fine men and women who choose to do so and recognise their commitment to ensuring the peace, safety and wellbeing of our communities, a duty which we should never take for granted. Our safety and that of our families, the security of our homes and our businesses and indeed our democracy are all reliant on the enforcement of our laws, a task which predominantly falls to our police. I acknowledge the member for Cowper and his service in the NSW Police Force; the member for La Trobe and his service in Victoria Police; and the members for Richmond, Dickson and Wide Bay for their service in the Queensland Police Service. This Police Remembrance Day I would like to take the opportunity to acknowledge the significant work that's being undertaken by our police with regard to assistance given to our respective health departments in combating COVID-19 outbreaks in our communities. The police continue to play an instrumental role on the front line in respect of the COVID-19 public health orders and restrictions, including maintaining, sadly, control at various protests, as we have seen. Police have been putting themselves on the front line in harm's way and have been personally attacked for doing their duty, which is to ensure the safety and wellbeing of our communities, particularly during this challenging period. Sadly, this year we will once again see the total number of police officers listed on the National Wall of Remembrance rise. This year we recognise the tragic loss of Senior Constable David Masters of the Queensland Police Service, who tragically was killed in the course of duty while trying to intercept a stolen vehicle. Senior Constable Masters was highly respected by his colleagues and his community, with his loyalty, commitment and positive attitude very much missed by those in the police family. Quite frankly, the death of Senior Constable Masters highlights the inherent dangers involved in all police work. These people are putting their lives at risk, not knowing what they are likely to encounter every time they go on the shift. Senior Constable Masters leaves behind his wife, Sharon, and his son, Jack. National Police Remembrance Day is, therefore, also a time to reflect on the loved ones that have been left behind. We mourn with them, we thank them and we honour all our police families, whose unconditional support allows these fine men and women to serve our communities. We owe it to the fallen to look after their families, which is why the work of Police Legacy is particularly important and deserving of our support. I note that the Wall to Wall Ride is a major fundraising event for police legacy. But, because of COVID, this year the Wall to Wall Ride has been cancelled; and many of the commemorative services have also been significantly restricted, but most, I understand, will be livestreamed. Like many, I look forward to being able to ride again next year with members and friends of the police family, and hopefully without COVID restrictions, so that we can show our support for Police Legacy. To Senior Constable Masters, to all the police officers who have made the ultimate sacrifice, and to all past and current members of the Police Force: we honour you and profoundly thank you for your service. To all those on the thin blue line: please know and understand that your service makes a difference for the better in our community. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I thank the member for that contribution. Is the motion seconded? 11:16 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper I second the motion. I'm very pleased to rise to speak on this motion and I thank the member for Fowler for acknowledging the significance of Police Remembrance Day. On 31 January 1984 a criminal, whose name shall not be preserved in this place, held up three banks in the inner city of Sydney, the last of them being the Commonwealth Bank at Circular Quay. There, he took three staff hostage and discharged his firearm during a siege. The young male offender emerged from the bank completely surrounded by five hostages. Traffic was chaotic, and police told people to abandon their cars and move away. The offender took that opportunity to direct all the hostages into a stolen vehicle. The car was pursued to the eastern suburbs and back over the Sydney Harbour Bridge down to Manly and back to the Spit Bridge, which had been closed by the police to prevent the car from proceeding. At this time, Detective Constable First Class Stephen Francis Canellis approached the car with a shotgun, which he knew he could not discharge under the circumstances, and attempted to arrest the offender. At that point, the offender shot Detective Canellis directly between the eyes. Detective Canellis's colleagues immediately fired on the offender, killing him. The hostages, though traumatised, were unharmed. Steve was seriously wounded. The bullet hit his skull and deflected through his throat. It missed the jugular vein and carotid artery, and came to rest in his shoulder. Through the work of medical staff, and perhaps divine intervention, Steve survived. Later that year, Steve received the New South Wales Police Commissioner's commendation. It read in part: 'Detective Constable First Class Canellis placed himself in a face-to-face situation with the man in an attempt to persuade him to surrender. Notwithstanding the detective constable's brave endeavours, he was fired upon by the offender and sustained serious wounds.' The following year, with the approval of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Steve was awarded a commendation for brave conduct. Steve served for another decade; he would not be identified by this one incident. Sadly, on 18 August 2021, he passed away after complications with treatment for cancer. He was 68. I knew Steve. He was a good man, a good family man. He will be missed by his family, his closest friends and the fellowship. What Steve did on that day was demonstrative of the bravery of tens of thousands of police officers every day in Australia. Steve was one of the lucky ones. Tragically, each year police officers' lives are lost protecting us and our communities. National Police Remembrance Day, observed on 29 September each year, is our opportunity to reflect and to honour the memory of the brave Australian police who have given their lives in the service of the community. Sadly, this year 10 names will be added to the National Police Memorial wall, three of whom lost their life in the past 12 months: Western Australia Police Force Detective Senior Constable Michael James Cursiter, who lost his life when he had a heart attack following the pursuit of an offender in Perth in November; New South Wales Police Force Senior Constable Kelly Foster, who lost her life while attempting to save a member of the public from drowning at Wollangambe Canyon in New South Wales this year; Queensland Police Service Senior Constable David Masters, who lost his life when he was struck by a stolen vehicle on the Bruce Highway at Burpengary in Queensland in June this year; and seven historical additions from Victoria, Western Australia and Tasmania. My thoughts and prayers go out to all the family members. I thank all members, sworn and unsworn, of all our police forces around the nation, and I thank you for your service. 11:21 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa It is my pleasure to rise to support the motion moved by the member for Fowler and seconded by the member for Cowper to appropriately recognise again National Police Remembrance Day. This day acknowledges the crucial role that police officers play across Australia. More importantly, at the end of September each year, police throughout Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and the Solomon Islands pause to honour officers whose lives have been cut short while performing their duties or as a result of their duties. This year we also acknowledge Senior Constable David Masters of the Queensland Police Service, who was killed while trying to intercept a stolen vehicle. I add my condolences to his family, friends and the Queensland police community. I also add my condolences to those whose names were read out by the member for Cowper, who spoke just before me. This important day is also a time to remember police officers who have lost their lives through illness or other circumstances. Whether it's in our local communities, social events, natural disasters or global pandemics, the police force is there to serve our community, and it does a wonderful job of that. National Police Remembrance Day is one of the most significant days in the police calendar, and as a nation we pause to remember those police officers who have lost their lives fulfilling their duty to protect their community, and to honour the courage and commitment of all police members. I want to also acknowledge Police Legacy, who provide financial and emotional support to the loved ones left behind. They ensure that families have someone to help them. Police Legacy provides some financial support so that children can still receive education and know that they are part of the bigger police community. The trust that a community places in its police force should never be underestimated. The risks faced by officers every day, in a variety of roles and responsibilities they take on, are recognised by all our community. Police officers are sought to act when people are facing some of the most distressing times in their lives. Situations such as these require calm and a clear and focused voice. That's what police officers provide, along with the confidence and leadership that is required to provide support and care when our community and people really need them. Many officers have had to face circumstances such as these on several occasions and conduct themselves with the utmost professionalism. I note particularly in the last few weeks with the protests that have been happening that some of our offices have been hurt in these protests. They are doing their job and they should not be the reason for an attack. This trust that the community has in the police force is tested daily. Although the events of the last 18 months have amplified this trust, from catastrophic bushfires to the current crisis of coronavirus, police officers across the country have repeatedly put themselves at increased risk. The police force already face a high degree of risk. There are many dangers that come with the roles and responsibilities of an officer—dangers that our police officers have to face day to day—and experiences that many people will never have to face, or even know are happening. Fulfilling the responsibilities of police work, while also managing the new risks Australians face every day with coronavirus, deserves all the merit it earns and so much more. The logistics support delivered by the New South Wales Police Force during this pandemic, not only in command, but officers on the ground, was essential to ensure the safety of the community. Throughout the changing landscape over the last 20 months, officers did not get complacent with the increased risk. They continue to keep our community safe. I would particularly like to acknowledge and thank Liverpool City Police Area Command police officers and Superintendent Adam Whyte. I know the Liverpool command has provided support and policing in the whole of New South Wales on border patrols, during recent protests, and by going door to door to ensure that members of our community are supported during lockdown. This is all on top of the normal work they need to do every day to keep our communities safe. I acknowledge and appreciate the work of Superintendent Whyte and his colleagues for their assistance and dedication to our community. Policing in a pandemic is not an easy job, and I thank the men and women of the police force in my community and around Australia every day for the job they do. I honour the nation's police officers' commitment, courage and dedication, ensuring the peace and safety of our community, and again acknowledge those who have made the supreme sacrifice doing their job to keep our communities safe. 11:26 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina When an emergency happens, as frightened people flee from the scene, police and other first responders run towards the danger to assist, to do what they can, to protect property, to save lives. It's instinct. They don't think twice; they just 'do'. As the proud father of a police officer, I support what our law enforcers do and thank them—not just on 29 September, National Police Remembrance Day, but every day—for the work they do and the risks they take, unflinchingly and willingly on our behalf. At a time when people across our country should be doing everything they can to support police in their duty, sadly there is an element in society who are doing everything but that. Shame on them. Why people feel the need to gather en masse to protest against COVID-19 lockdowns, in defiance of state impositions, is beyond belief. Not only is it breaking the law; it is also placing at risk their lives and livelihoods and those around them, including the police sent to keep the peace. And that is the point. Police are assigned to these protests to maintain law and order. They do not deserve to be abused, spat on, have projectiles hurled at them, or for their horses to be punched in the head. That is not how Australia should be in 2021. Sadly there are those, even members and senators in this place, I am disappointed to say, who have not helped the situation. For an MP to exaggerate about police actions at these protests, falsely claiming protesters were brutalised by police, is beyond the pale. How about condemning the protesters for breaching public health orders first, instead of unfairly and unjustly castigating the brave men and women in blue sent to these illegal gatherings to do their job. I know of a young constable who has been physically assaulted in uniform multiple times in the first 17 months of his policing career—multiple times. And then we have MPs, supposed to be people's representatives, pointing accusatory fingers at those courageous officers, from beneath their doonas in the sanctuary of their darkened rooms, from the bravery of their keyboards. These same people would be the first to squeal if police were not on the scene within minutes if they ever needed them. Give me a break. Better still, give the police a break. Police deserve our encouragement. Police deserve our support and respect always. Our courts should not be revolving doors for criminals; and magistrates should and must back our police in their work, with appropriate sentencing. In my home town, Wagga Wagga, the community is fortunate to have had a police chief such as Bob Noble for nearly eight years. Now the commander of the Riverina Police District, Superintendent Noble has carried out his duties with dignity, grace and style. He is a fine leader and a credit to the New South Wales Police Force. It has not been easy for him. He hadn't been in charge 12 months when the Hunt family tragedy occurred near Lockhart—a husband and father taking the lives of his poor wife, their three beautiful children and himself. It was a tough time for everyone in this close-knit country community, not least the local police called to deal with this horrific and senseless crime. Superintendent Noble coordinated the initial investigation before Sydney homicide detectives arrived. He later told the Guardian's Gabrielle Chan he found it all quite upsetting. He said: … I am very proud of the work done by police in helping community through that, particularly the friends and family of the deceased … People chose to live in rural communities simply because there is a deeper investment in the people around you. That's a double edged sword, when the bad thing happens, they knock you around that much more badly. It was a deeply disturbing case, but police deal with difficult matters every day in a caring and professional way. A recent report said that, on average, across this nation, police deal with 594 domestic violence incidents each day. That is just so sad, so unfortunate. I also wish to acknowledge Rod Smith, who has progressed from Wagga Wagga to overseeing Goulburn police academy to the important role of assistant commissioner. He embodies everything we want and expect our uniformed officers to be. So let us thank our police. They do the job asked of them by governments for and on behalf of the people they are tasked to preserve and protect. We especially honour those who have fallen in the line of duty, who made the ultimate sacrifice. Thank you to police officers across Australia for what you do, for the risks you must take, for the difference you make, and for the bravery you've shown in the past, you show now and will always show. 11:31 Mr ROB MITCHELL M3E McEwen [by video link] It is with great pride that I rise to support the motion moved by the member for Fowler. Our country owes a great deal of debt to the men and women of our police forces who have made, and continue to make, great sacrifices in the service of our community and our country. On 29 December, our nation will observe National Police Remembrance Day and, rightfully, will pay tribute to the crucial role that police officers play right across this nation. Australians serve in our communities, and they accept the immense risk to them as part of the sacrifice of their role serving the Australian people. Throughout this COVID pandemic, we have seen Australian police officers again and again put themselves on the front line, providing crucial services to our communities throughout one of the most difficult periods in our country. We live in one of the safest countries on the planet, and we owe our police officers an immense debt for providing us with that safety. We commend the brave men and women of our police forces for undertaking their duties with integrity, compassion and for serving our communities with such pride. It's of the utmost importance that we take the time to recognise the services of police officers, and to honour the lives and memories of those police officers who have paid the ultimate sacrifice in the course of their duties in order to ensure a safer community for all of us. The police officers who have lost their lives in the course of their duties are true Australian heroes. They were the bravest amongst us, and we owe them the utmost respect and reverence. This year we honour the life and memory of Senior Constable David Masters of the Queensland Police Service, who lost his life in the line of duty. The men and women of our police force serve on the front lines of our community. They place themselves, using all their bravery and integrity, in the path of danger to ensure our communities are protected. In many ways, their loved ones share the sacrifices they make. On National Police Remembrance Day, we pay tribute to the families and friends of those police officers who may have been killed in the line of duty throughout our nation's history. We acknowledge their families' pain and sacrifice, and we thank them for their strength. It is also fitting that we commend the work of Police Legacy, who look after the loved ones of police officers who have fallen in the line of duty. It's the men and women of our police forces who safeguard our communities. Police officers are the backbone of so many of our communities, acting in capacities reaching far beyond law enforcement as they seek to ensure the health and wellbeing of the communities they serve. These are Australian heroes, and they deserve our utmost gratitude and respect. When I think back to the aftermath of Black Saturday, I think of the police who are out there day in and day out. Every single time there is a national disaster, the police put their lives and their mental health on the line, and I have seen personally the impact that has on the great men and women who have been out there doing the right thing for our communities. We can never thank them enough. I'm very blessed to know a few police members, including former Assistant Commissioner Brian Harding, who recently launched a book. When you sit back and hear the stories of what police officers have done and how they've been able to work in and manage communities to bring out the best in them it's just second to none. As the member for Riverina said, we know that in a time of crisis they're the first people there. They're there in situations that we hope we would never ever have to see, but they're always there to help us and to help the rest of the community. Quite often, as we've seen, they're also—unfairly—on the front line for abuse and attack by ignorant morons in our community. We have all come foul of the law occasionally; a few times they have been of great assistance to me in helping to increase the state's coffers with a few indiscretions I've had over the years—the odd speeding ticket—to help keep the community in the black. But we always know that, first and foremost, they're there. I was with them through my younger days in driving tow trucks; they were always there when it was a fatality. It's the police who did the hard stuff. Imagine being in the situations that they have to put themselves in. They have to go to someone's home and tell them that a loved one is not coming home. And there was the year before, where we saw four of our Victorian police officers killed in a terrible tragedy—disgustingly, filmed by a piece of filth whose name I will not use. Those four officers should never be forgotten for the work they did and that they were trying to do. At the end of the day our police are there to protect our communities and to protect our lives, and we should be grateful and thankful to them. I want to congratulate all the people who have been involved with this, but I want to pay my respects to the former police officers who are serving in our community—including my friend the member for Richmond—who I know have done so much for this community and who never stop giving. I just want to pay my respects to them as well. 11:36 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid I rise to speak today about National Police Remembrance Day, and I acknowledge and thank the member for Fowler for moving this important motion. For 24 hours, seven days a week and 365 days a year, the men and women of the police services of Australia protect us. From regional towns to the inner cities, and in my electorate of Reid, they put on the blue uniform every day and serve their communities with professionalism, courage and commitment. They put their lives on the line to keep our community safe and to keep Australia safe. Today, and at the upcoming National Police Remembrance Day on 29 September, we will pause to thank them and reflect on the bravery of police officers who have served and who continue to serve, and we will pay tribute to those officers who have been killed in the line of duty. Sadly, this year, a further 10 names will be added to the National Police Memorial wall, three of whom lost their lives in the past 12 months: Western Australian police Detective Senior Constable Michael James Cursiter; NSW Police Force Senior Constable Kelly Foster; and Queensland police Senior Constable David Masters. The death of any police officer is a tragedy for their loved ones, for their colleagues and for the community. The grief and pain may be different, but we all feel it. We all feel it because we recognise that police officers stand between us and those who seek to do harm. They run towards danger when others run from it. The role of the police is also at the forefront of many people's minds in the community at this time. Policing during COVID-19 is not an easy task; it is multifaceted and there are many aspects to it. For our police officers serving on the front line in New South Wales it's particularly difficult right now. They have been given incredible powers, but we know that these are powers which they can't wait to relinquish. We know that it's incredibly difficult for police to have to enforce COVID-19 restrictions at funerals, church services and family gatherings. The reality is that we ask a lot of our police; to enforce the law is not an easy task. But we must not lose sight of the fact that they themselves have families. Just like us, they're also living through this lockdown. Each day they leave their families to serve the community. We only have to reflect on the violent protests we saw in Sydney a few weeks ago to recognise the risks officers are under. While I recognise that, for some, seeing more police on the streets is not reassuring at this time, we must remember that just as we empower our police to take drunk drivers off the road and to find speeding drivers, so too we empower them to keep us safe by minimising the spread of COVID-19 in our communities during these challenging times. I also want to take this opportunity to commend the vital work of Police Legacy, who look after the loved ones of fallen officers. They provide practical care at difficult times; this might mean supporting children through their education, providing referrals for bereavement counselling and other social services or introducing them to other Police Legacy families who have also gone through the same grief. I am honoured and humbled to stand here today and remember Michael James Cursiter, Kelly Foster and David Masters. They are heroes. This National Police Remembrance Day we will pause to express our gratitude to those who protect and serve our communities, and ensure that those who have fallen are never forgotten. 11:41 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond [by video link] I also support the motion recognising National Police Remembrance Day, which is observed on 29 September this year. I acknowledge all the previous speakers and agree with their sentiments. Police Remembrance Day commemorates police officers from all Australian police services who have made the ultimate sacrifice to protect our community. As a former police officer myself I'd like to thank and acknowledge all police right across the nation for the incredible work they do. I would also like to acknowledge the member for Fowler for again moving this important motion, and acknowledge his ongoing dedication to this day of remembrance and his continued advocacy in all areas of policing. I note the motion: (f) reaffirms its support for the nation's police officers and honours their courage, commitment and dedication in ensuring the peace and safety of our communities. It also: (a) acknowledges the crucial role police officers across Australia play in our local communities and the tremendous risk and sacrifice that comes with their duty. Police Remembrance Day is a time for all of us to reflect and remember the very real risks our police officers face on a constant basis. I would also especially like to point out the increased duties our police have had since the pandemic started 18 months ago. There have been many challenges with increasing COVID-19 health restrictions across the nation—particularly in my home state of New South Wales, which is currently in lockdown. Today I'd like to make special mention of all the police in my electorate of Richmond, on the New South Wales North Coast, who serve and protect our community. I want to thank all those officers serving in commands here specifically for their efforts during the current crisis. I know firsthand the outstanding work they do. Police Remembrance Day is a time when we pause and honour the lives and memories of police who have had their lives tragically cut short in their work protecting us. It's also a very solemn and important day for police officers, their loved ones and the wider police family. In particular, we pay tribute to the men and women of the service who have made the ultimate sacrifice. Together we must ensure their legacies are preserved. This year we specifically paid tribute to Senior Constable David Masters, of the Queensland Police Service, who was tragically killed on 26 June this year while trying to intercept a stolen vehicle. I wish to extend my deepest sympathies to his family, friends and colleagues. It's in these very difficult times that wider support is incredibly essential. On that note I wish to pay tribute to the very enduring work of Police Legacy, an incredible organisation providing services to police legatees across the state. It was established as an association in 1987 and became incorporated in 1991, and for more than 30 years it has been providing essential support and assistance to families. Today, NSW Police Legacy assists approximately 1,300 police legatees by providing that support, compassion and so many services and advocacy to those legatees. As a former general duties police officer myself, I've seen firsthand some of the situations and complexities that police officers face day in, day out while serving their communities. They often have to face confronting, dangerous situations and also have to attend fatal incidents and horrific tragedies. I would like to acknowledge and commend police for their empathy, strength and professionalism in performing such work. I'd also like to acknowledge the post-traumatic stress disorders that some officers may carry as a direct result of their police experience. Recognising and responding to the issues, pressures and challenges that our police face is indeed essential, and we must raise the public's awareness of the realities that police officers face in their duties. There are so many specific challenges in policing and in regional areas like mine on the New South Wales north coast. As I've said publicly many times and commented on before, I'll continue to stand with my community in calling for more police and more resources for regional communities like mine on the far north coast of New South Wales. On Police Remembrance Day, I encourage locals in my area and across the country to take the time to think about the role that police officers play within our community, in our state and indeed right throughout the nation. It's an occasion for us all to recognise those services and acknowledge the work they are doing to keep us safe, and particularly remember those police who have made the ultimate sacrifice to protect our community. I commend the motion to the House. 11:46 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I want to acknowledge the member for Fowler, who has brought this motion today. It's a very important one. I won't use the term heroes to describe our men and women who serve this country in blue, and in fact all our emergency services workers, because it's so overused these days. But we thank them for their service. We rightly give so much emphasis to our men and women who wear khaki for the work and service that they do for this country and give to this country, but we don't recognise enough the service that our emergency service workers and, in particular, our police give. I want to join the chorus in acknowledging Police Remembrance Day on 29 September this year, as we do every year, and I hope that this year I will be able to join with my local constabulary in my own electorate and take part in those proceedings that we will have on 29 September to recognise and remember those who have fallen in the service of their communities. The Queensland Police Service motto is 'With Honour We Serve,' and I think in difficult times you should always go back to your roots. It doesn't matter what job you're in; you should always go back to your roots, always go back to why you're in this job in the first place. For the police, for all those men and women who are out there serving today, go back to your roots, go back to your motto. It's 'With Honour We Serve' in Queensland. In Victoria it's 'Tenez le droit,' Latin for 'uphold the right'. Those are two great mottos that serve as a remembrance to all serving men and women as to why they do what they do and why they continue to put themselves in harm's way to protect their communities. We acknowledge those men and women who have died in service of their community. In particular, I want to acknowledge Senior Constable David Masters, who was killed in Queensland in June this year. I was driving back from Canberra, from Brisbane airport, that very morning. We got diverted and the traffic was unbelievable; what is normally an hour and a half's drive to get home took me about four hours. I got diverted off the Bruce Highway and I was selfishly thinking, 'What's going on here?' I turned the radio on and learned that Senior Constable David Masters had been killed as a result of being struck by a stolen vehicle that very morning, and a profound sense of grief overcame me; here I was complaining about my travel being disrupted for a few hours, and this young man had lost his life in the service of his community. It's a poignant reminder of the dangers that these men and women put themselves in. It's not just the deaths that impact on our police service and emergency service workers. As the member for Richmond just indicated, it's the PTSD and the mental health problems that many suffer as a result of their service. I've work closely with members of the QPS—in particular, one of my mates from the Alex Surf Club who was a scenes-of-crime officer. He has shared with me the unbelievable sorrow that he carries with him as a result of his many, many years as a scenes-of-crime officer. Most people could not even imagine let alone live through what those men and women are exposed to on a daily basis. I want to acknowledge the superintendent of the north coast region, Craig Hawkins, and Inspector Jason Overland, whom I have very good relationships with locally. I want to acknowledge the member for Wide Bay, the member for Cowper, the Minister for Defence, the member for Richmond and the Assistant Minister for Customs, Community Safety and Multicultural Affairs for their service to their communities around this great country. Again, I want to thank the member for Fowler for bringing this very, very important motion. 11:51 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair [by video link] On National Police Remembrance Day, on 29 September each year, we honour the courage, commitment and dedication of our police in ensuring the peace and safety of our community. With honour they serve. I commend this motion and thank the member for Fowler. National Police Remembrance Day is observed in my community every year at Browns Park, where we honour a local constable who originally came from Scotland and gave his life to save two people in Ipswich back in the late 19th century. There is a monument in Browns Park in Ipswich to honour his legacy. But tragically since that time, hundreds of police have given their lives in service, and their families have lived with that sacrifice. We thank them for their commitment. As a lawyer, I have profound respect and sincere gratitude for those police officers who particularly work in child protection. I want to thank, in my local community, Sergeant Nadine Webster, who got an Australian police medal this year in the Australia Day awards for the work she has done in the crime prevention unit here in Ipswich; and Senior Constable Kerrin Sheedy and all the other constables and police officers in my community who make the Ipswich, Somerset and Karana Downs area safe. It's important we acknowledge the crucial role they undertake. I also want to thank a friend of mine, the president and CEO of the Queensland police union, Ian Leavers, for his years of advocacy on behalf of police, often agitating, irritating and annoying government, but doing the right thing by the police officers who he represents and acting on their behalf and in their best interests. Thank you, Ian, for your service as well. Every night and day, the men and women of the Queensland Police Service work to protect and support our community. Unfortunately, so many have paid the ultimate sacrifice. I want to thank their family and friends for what they've done. I note that National Police Remembrance Day this year specifically honours a Queensland police constable, Senior Constable David Masters, who was killed trying to intercept a stolen vehicle at 3 am on Saturday 26 June 2021. He was performing his duties as a member of the Deception Bay police station on the Bruce Highway at Burpengary. He deployed road spikes across the highway in an attempt to stop the driver of a speeding stolen vehicle, when the driver swerved and struck Senior Constable Masters, tragically resulting in fatal injuries. Each year we remember people like Senior Constable David Masters. As I said, for many years I've attended the local National Police Remembrance Day in Browns Park in Ipswich, but I also attended the unveiling of what was then the new Queensland police memorial within the Brisbane City Botanic Gardens. That was in 2019. This memorial provides a place of reflection for families and friends of officers who since 1862 have died serving the community of Queensland, both as a colony and now as a state. The motion from the member for Fowler also commends the valuable work of Police Legacy, who have looked after the loved ones of police officers who have fallen. In my home state of Queensland, the Queensland Police Legacy was established in 1971 and does a fantastic job assisting the dependent families of deceased Queensland police officers. They're currently supporting 48 Queensland police families and meeting the educational expenses of 78 children. We want to thank the police for what they've done. We want to thank them for the work they undertake. But this month I will be attending in my home city of Ipswich the Child Protection Week awards. There are many organisations who assist the Queensland police in protecting our local community. They are brothers and sisters in arms. They are allies and comrades of the Queensland Police Service. I thank those organisations who will be honoured and those who have been nominated. I'll be there to support you once again. In summary, I thank the Queensland Police Service, the police services all around the country and their families and friends. I offer you my thoughts and prayers and my deepest gratitude for the work you've undertaken and for the sacrifice you've experienced. 11:56 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean I also rise to support the motion of the members for Fowler and Cowper in relation to National Police Remembrance Day. The mask I wear in parliament today is one that I have from the Australian Federal Police Association. It's representative of a long connection I have with our local police. Before I entered federal politics I worked in the labour movement for more than a decade, including as industrial relations manager with the Australian Federal Police Association. I relished my time with the AFPA and got a much better understanding of the diverse and complex range of responsibilities, from community policing in a fast-growing city to counterterrorism, forensics, cybercrime, international deployments and protection services both here and abroad. I came to appreciate the enormous risk and stress that many of our police members are under both here and abroad. Sadly, during that time, this included the loss of members' lives. This year we remember 10 officers who have lost their lives across our police services. We remember their families. This year we also recognise the extraordinary additional work done by our police services in relation to the challenges posed by the pandemic. Police Week 2021 will be held across the country from Saturday 18 September and conclude on 29 September, National Police Remembrance Day. Because of many of the challenges of COVID, many of the events that would typically occur will not be able to go ahead in the same way. It is hoped we are still able to have the national service here later in September. It's worth reminding members that there are opportunities to support Police Legacy and that those efforts are really important given that those opportunities are limited because many of the events won't go ahead in the same way. I continue to welcome the opportunity to meet with members of the AFPA and the Police Federation of Australia and their members to ensure that the concerns that affect them in their working lives are raised here in this parliament. I'm mindful of the value of the importance of maintaining that regular and close contact with those whose daily work places them at the front line of policing and security. I'm committed to working cooperatively with the association and its members to strengthen the AFP's capability to deal with the significant challenges we face. This motion particularly relates to those 10 officers who lost their lives over the last year. In that time when I worked for the AFPA, I knew that policing came with a degree of risk—a degree of risk which, thankfully, most members of the community will never have to face. Through my involvement post that AFPA involvement, I came to understand that it takes a special type of person with a special type of courage to commit to wearing the police uniform. We are truly indebted to the men and women who choose to do so. This year we particularly remember Senior Constable Masters and his family. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! 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. BILLS 27 BILLS Foreign Intelligence Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 27

Foreign Intelligence Legislation Amendment Bill 2021

Returned from Senate 27 Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021 27

Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021

Second Reading 27 12:00 Mr BRENDAN O'CONNOR 00AN3 Gorton [by video link] I rise to speak on the Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021 and to express Labor's support for this important legislation. Next month marks 20 years since the September 11 terrorist attacks on the United States, events which precipitated strategic decisions and legal reforms that are with us and evolve today. One of the first decisions was the military intervention in Afghanistan against those who gave safe haven to terrorists. Twenty years later, in the very present, we were last week witness to another terrorist attack on American lives and the lives of those who assisted Western forces. Labor condemns in the strongest terms the terrorist attack at Kabul airport that caused the death of at least 60 people and injured dozens more. This was a despicable act against Afghans seeking security and those who were helping them. I note that Islamic State Khorasan Province, a group the government has listed as a terrorist organisation, has claimed responsibility. We grieve with the people of Afghanistan and with our US allies. We remain gravely concerned for Australian citizens and visa holders who remain in Afghanistan and can no longer safely travel to Kabul airport. As I noted in this place last week, there is and will continue to be analysis, commentary and debate as to the merits or otherwise of the 20-year mission, along with the understandable concern and, sometimes, complaint about the manner of the withdrawal. Much of our focus needs to be on what can be done to help those in Afghanistan who helped our troops and diplomatic staff and now need our help. I reiterate our calls for the government to ensure that Afghan nationals who assisted our troops, and their families, are taken to safety. It is not only a moral obligation we owe; such actions are of vital strategic importance. Our standing in the world, our ability to work with locals and foster trust in the future and our ability to further prevent the conditions that allow extremist activity to thrive very much depend on how we act now. Another way to address and prevent the rise of terrorism, and a focus of this bill, is to combat the financing of terrorist groups and to limit access to funds. One of the immediate actions taken in the wake of the September 11 attacks was United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, adopted on 28 September 2001. Australia, as a UN member state, has an obligation under this resolution to prevent and suppress the financing of terrorist acts, to freeze the assets of individual terrorists and terrorist entities and to prevent the provision of assets to those persons and entities. Denying terrorists and terrorist groups the ability to access the funds necessary to commit terrorist acts strengthens our commitment to preventing and suppressing terrorist acts now and into the future. This bill ensures that Australia continues to fully implement its international counterterrorism sanctions obligations. As a UN member state, Australia takes seriously its obligations to contribute to global peace, stability and security in accordance with international law. One of the strongest and most enduring bipartisan views of this parliament is that an effective and enforceable counterterrorism financial sanctions regime is vital for Australia to uphold its obligations to the international community and combat the financing of terrorism in Australia and around the world. We note that the Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021 seeks to amend the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945 to specify that counterterrorism financial sanctions listings, made under section 15 of the act, and revocations, made under section 16 of the act, be made by legislative instrument. The act makes provision for, amongst other things, the listing of persons or entities associated with the commission of terrorist acts and assets owned or controlled by those persons or entities. The purpose of a listing under section 15 of the act is to make it an offence to use or deal with the assets of or make an asset available to a listed person or entity, as well as to use or deal with a listed asset or class of assets. This regime is an important tool which implements Australia's international obligations to cooperate on the prevention of terrorist financing. The amendment bill also confirms the validity of action that has been taken or which may in the future need to be taken in respect of conduct relating to historical counterterrorism listings that were made administratively. We also note that the amendment bill will not retrospectively change the operation of the Charter of the United Nations Act, alter a criminal offence, impose any additional punishment or vary the terms or scope of any previous counterterrorism listings made by the authority of the minister. Labor supports efforts to ensure the effective application and enforceability of Australia's counterterrorism legislative framework to prevent and counter the financing of terrorism acts. As such Labor supports the Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021 and welcomes its passage through the parliament. 12:06 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins Australia's counterterrorism measures are a pivotal part of our country's greater obligation to our global community. Of enormous importance is ensuring that we prevent and suppress terrorist acts by stemming access to funds and other financial and economic resources. The recent events in Afghanistan have reminded us not only of what terrorism is capable of but that the fight against it must continue without complacency. Terrorist activity is layered in complexity and does not have an easy solution. But Australia is committed and will continue to ensure that we starve terrorist organisations of resources that would otherwise empower them in their actions. The Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021 seeks a minor but important change in how Australia treats counterterrorism financial sanctions listings. These listings serve to make it an offence to use or deal with the assets of or make an asset available to the listed person or entity, as well as to use or deal with a listed asset or class of asset. The bill will make these counterterrorism sanctions listings legislative instruments on the Federal Register of Legislation. Functionally, this reduces the risk of a successful legal challenge relating to the enforceability of the listings. The advice for this amendment comes from the Australian Government Solicitor and ensures optimal consistency of the process for listing persons and entities for counterterrorism financial sanctions under the Charter of the United Nations Act. I stress that the bill does not impact the validity of any counterterrorism listings. Instead, it allows for an increase in the enforceability of the very sanctions that protect our way of life and security for all Australians. With all current counterterrorism listings registered on the Federal Register of Legislation in late May this year, this legislative change is important and necessary. This bill hedges Australia's bets and puts beyond doubt the enforceability of listings before registration on the Federal Register of Legislation. In the event that any of these listings were found to have legislative characteristics, this bill would stand to protect listings in the period prior their registration. Core to the Australian way of life is a feeling of safety, a knowledge that, while terrorism exists in this world, the government is informed and committed to shutting down domestic threats. Crucial to this is our international commitment to the Charter of the United Nations, whereby Australia alongside the other allied nations come together in a powerful force against terrorist activity. By making it an offence to deal with listed terrorist organisations, Australians are protected from the nefarious activities of these groups, whose attacks on the innocent in the name of hate itself threaten the freedoms we enjoy in our wonderful country. I call on all Australians to think of the heartbreaking images we have seen recently coming out of Afghanistan, particularly of those at the heavily contested Kabul airport. We've seen parents hand over their children to American forces so they can have a chance at life, knowing full well they may never see them again. We've seen individuals cling to the fuselages of departing planes on runways just to have a chance of freedom—the freedom we may take for granted in Australia, the freedom that makes Australia the very place we call home. This is a sobering reminder throughout the global pandemic, which has been on our minds for the last 18 months, that there are other global issues that we must keep at the forefront of our minds both as policymakers here in this place and as Australians. Now is not the time to live in the echo chamber of what matters mostly to Australians. The events in Afghanistan remind us of our global commitment and help us understand the privileges we enjoy here at home. Our international brothers and sisters around the world look to our liberal democracy, freedoms, ethical law and respect for the rule of law and for its institutions. These are the things that make us Australia and these are the things that we must protect. The least we can do as a nation in the fight against terrorist activity is to limit funding to terrorist groups. As part of the cornerstone of our counterterrorism policy, this bill strengthens the ability for Australia to enforce these rules and keeps dangerous assets out of the hands of people who would commit terrible and inhumane acts, threatening not only our people and our homeland but the globe's humanity. The reach of terrorist activity is something the Morrison government does not take lightly at all. In fact, the Prime Minister has already taken steps to ensure that domestic websites will not be able to host harmful and extremist content from terrorists. This is something that we as Australians should all welcome and was initiated in the wake of the Christchurch terrorist attack. The Morrison government rose to tackle the issue at hand, whereby criminals were given platforms to glorify their crimes. We watched in horror during that Christchurch terrorist attack, but I think the world looked to the Morrison government for its early initial response, and this was welcomed around the world. This act was unacceptable, and this government has seen, since then, the outlaw of the spread of this type of material that threatens the ability for Australians and other citizens around the world to feel safe at home and at work but also, importantly, online. Moreover, the Morrison government's action included establishing a 24/7 crisis coordination centre to monitor and notify relevant government agencies of online crisis events involving terrorist and extreme violence material and will provide the eSafety Commissioner with information to undertake rapid assessments. In addition to these measures, the Morrison government has established a task force to combat terrorist and extreme violent material online. We all know the benefits of open-access internet. It's helpful as an educational resource, it's helpful with information as we deal with things like the global pandemic that we're all facing and it's a means of communication for those who may not able to access it more easily, particularly in rural and remote parts of Australia, and, of course, we've all relied on online open access for our entertainment through lockdowns during COVID. But the Morrison government does not view the internet completely through rose tinted glasses. The government recognises the possible dissemination of material allowing for extremism to flourish, and we have taken measures to halt this. These actions have helped secure the internet environment for all Australians. This bill cannot be simply reduced to the legislative changes before us. We must keep the bigger global picture in the front of our minds. Terrorist activity continues to flourish, but the Morrison government is leading the way in restricting these groups' access to resources. This bill marks a crucial step forward for Australian counterterrorism as part of our global obligations, ensuring optimal consistency by registering all listings with the Federal Register of Legislation—and, subsequently, enforcement of relevant policy is made rock solid removing any doubt it could have led to legal challenges. We will not relax on the important issue of our national security, especially in the case of the global terrorist threat. As the House moves forward, we must be constantly reminded of why this legislation exists. We cannot forget the terrorism that exists in this world. The good that we do in this place needs to thwart the efforts of those who seek to subvert human rights; we owe it to ourselves, our children, our nation and the world. 12:15 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid I rise to support the Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021. In two weeks we will mark 20 years since the September 11 attacks. For anyone who witnessed those scenes 20 years ago, the images of the towers falling, the sheer unbelievability of it, the numbness it evoked—I remember many people at the time thinking it was a scene from a movie playing on their TV. And, although 20 years have passed, the memory of those attacks has not dimmed in our consciousness; those images remain within us. Days after those attacks, the UN Security Council adopted resolution 1373 in response. Resolution 1373 further built upon the International Convention on the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and council resolution 1267. It requires Australia, as a UN member state, to suppress terrorism by implementing targeted financial sanctions in relation to persons involved in terrorist activities. Under Australian law, the foreign minister can designate a person or entity who commits, attempts to commit, participates or facilitates the commission of terrorist attacks. This is an important national security measure because, as has been noted by the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive, the reality is that terrorism financing is a global phenomenon which not only threatens member states' security but also undermines economic development and financial market stability. It is therefore of paramount importance to stem the flow of funds to terrorists. You only have to look at the individuals and organisations Australia has imposed sanctions on to understand why this bill we are debating today matters. To date, Australia has implemented sanctions against members of al-Qaeda, financiers of al-Qaeda, members of the al-Nuresh Front and individuals and entities who were part of the illegal annexation of Crimea, just to name a few. There are over 6,900 individuals and entities on Australia's consolidated list that are subject to targeted financial sanctions. Australia has a strong track record when it comes to combating the financing of terrorism, including hosting the 'No Money for Terror' Ministerial Conference on Counter-Terrorism Financing in 2019. This conference included 65 delegations. This included 23 ministers; representatives from 15 international bodies, including the United Nations, the Financial Action Task Force and Financial Action Task Force style regional bodies; and representatives from 28 private sector and not-for-profit organisations. The 2019 conference assessed the evolving global and Indo-Pacific threat environments. Consistent with UN Security Council resolution 2462 in 2019 and the global standards set by the Financial Action Task Force, participants agreed to promote international and regional cooperation and improve capacity to combat the financing of terrorism. We know that the task ahead for Australia and other countries when it comes to freezing assets and stopping the flow of finance to terrorist organisations will only become more difficult—especially given the increasing use of digital and cryptocurrencies, which, when coupled with other anonymising technologies and use of the dark web, provide new channels through which terrorist financiers can hide their financial dealings. That's just another reason why the surveillance legislation amendment bill the House was debating last week was so important. The bill before us now is a relatively simple legislative change but a vitally important one to provide certainty around the enforceability of counterterrorism listings. Successive governments since 2001 have treated counterterrorism listings made under part 4 of the Charter of the United Nations Act as administrative rather than legislative in character. This means that CT listings were made via Gazette notice rather than being registered as legislative instruments on the Federal Register of Legislation. This bill acts on updated advice to government, which recommended registering the listings as instruments on the federal register to reduce the risk of successful legal challenge relating to their enforceability. In line with this advice, all current CT listings which were originally gazetted were registered on the FRL on 26 May 2021. Despite the registration, the legislative change is still required to put beyond doubt the validity of any past enforcement of historical listings. This bill has been introduced out of an abundance of caution to put beyond doubt the enforceability of these listings before they were registered on the federal register. But, Mr Deputy Speaker, you only have to look at the entities and organisations on the counterterrorism listing to understand why you would rather have an abundance of caution than let any one of these try to test a potential legal loophole. Thank you. I commend the bill to the House. 12:21 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne In summing up, I thank those who have spoken on the Charter of the United Nations Amendment Bill 2021 for their contributions to this debate. The Australian government is committed to preventing and suppressing terrorist acts to support international peace and security. One of the most effective ways to combat terrorism is to deny terrorists and terrorist entities the ability to access the funds necessary for the commission of terrorist acts, which Australia does through the Charter of the United Nations Act 1945. This bill is not about altering the existing regulatory framework set out by that act. Put simply, it is about transparency and putting beyond doubt any question of the enforceability of validly made listings. The amendments in this bill change the way counterterrorism financial sanction listings are communicated to the public by ensuring that counterterrorism listings, once made, are registered on the Federal Register of Legislation as legislative instruments. These amendments ensure that part 4 of the Charter of the United Nations Act, the counterterrorism legislative framework, is able to operate as intended by parliament to prevent and respond to the financing of terrorism. The government looks forward to implementing this legislation. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 31 12:24 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Designs Amendment (Advisory Council on Intellectual Property Response) Bill 2020 31

Designs Amendment (Advisory Council on Intellectual Property Response) Bill 2020

Second Reading 31 12:24 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill, and I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill continues the Morrison government's commitment to improve the intellectual property system. A well-functioning IP system fosters innovation and encourages the development of new ideas. The registered designs system aims to give the 1.3 million people working in design intensive industries the confidence to create new and innovative products. This bill will improve the registered designs system to support this important sector, estimated to contribute $68 billion dollars annually to the economy, or 3.5 per cent of GDP. The bill responds to a report by the former Advisory Council on IP. The report considered the effectiveness of the designs system in stimulating innovation, and its impact on economic growth. The government has consulted extensively and has listened closely to the views of stakeholders. The bill strikes the right balance between the needs of designers, third parties and the broader public. This bill provides more flexibility for designers during the early stages of seeking design protection. It clarifies and simplifies the designs system. This in turn delivers timely benefits for designers, improving confidence and certainty to invest in our design economy. The bill amends the Designs Act 2003 to implement a grace period, or a safety net, to protect designers. At present, if a designer publicly discloses a design before applying for protection, they cannot get IP rights. The grace period will give designers 12 months to apply for protection after publicly using their design. The grace period also aligns Australia with many of our major trading partners, making it easier for our designers to seek protection overseas, and encouraging international designers to bring their work to Australia. Australian businesses who have licensed exclusive rights for a design will now be able to bring infringement action, without needing to rely on the owner. When an exclusive licence design right is granted, it is often because the owner is based overseas. This amendment ensures that exclusive licensees can enforce the rights they paid for, as is already the case for patents, trademarks and plant breeder's rights. The bill also simplifies the registration process for designers and reduces red tape. It will remove the rarely used option to publish a design application without a registration. It will also make requests for registration automatic, after a fixed period, unless the designer indicates otherwise. To further streamline registration, the formal requirements for filing a design application will be moved out of the Designs Regulations and into a non-legislative instrument, made by the Registrar of Designs at IP Australia. As well as delivering benefits for designers, the bill will also implement safeguards to protect third parties in the design sector who are operating in good faith. A prior use exemption to the infringement of designs will be created. This will safeguard third parties that start using a disclosed design during the grace period introduced by this bill. This exemption protects businesses who have invested in a publicly disclosed design during the grace period, when they cannot know if the designer intends to seek IP protection. The bill will also extend the current innocent infringer defence so that relief is available from any time after the design's filing date. This reduces the risk of a design right being innocently infringed in the six months between its filing date and registration. During this time there may be no way to know that the design may be protected, as it is not yet published. Finally, the bill also makes a range of smaller technical corrections and improvements to the designs system and improve fairness. I am pleased to introduce this bill, which will enhance our IP system and support the design sector. 12:29 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley [by video link] Labor clearly will be supporting this bill. However, I foreshadow that my friend and colleague the member for Whitlam will be moving a second reading amendment. It's good to finally get here to discuss this bill, the Designs Amendment (Advisory Council on Intellectual Property Response) Bill 2020. It seeks to implement some of the recommendations of the 2015 Advisory Council on Intellectual Property report. Here we are in 2021 looking at what was done back in 2015, at the work of that council, which basically aimed to provide more flexibility for designers during the early stages of getting registered design protection. I think it's worth noting the time line of the legislation, for the sake of the House. Nearly 10 years ago the council was tasked by the previous Labor government with investigating the effectiveness of the design systems in stimulating innovation by Australian users, and the impact the design system has on economic growth. That was in 2012, for the sake of full detail. Then, in 2015, the council made a series of recommendations, the first of which stated that the Designs Act should be amended as soon as practicable. Commissioned to do the investigation in 2012, the council came down with a report in 2015 that said that the work should be done as soon as practicable. The council report also found a clear need for increased harmonisation with international practices and recommended a number of other changes. Those changes included: compulsory examination for renewed designs, removal of the option for the publication of designs as an alternative to registration, and reintroduction of an opposition process. The report also identified clear scope to improve design protection, including the introduction of a grace period to protect against inadvertent disclosure of a design, which is an important mechanism itself. So, in 2012 a report was commissioned; in 2015 they reported; by March 2016 the coalition responded to the report, rejecting just one of the 23 recommendations made by the council; and here we are, well past the middle of 2021, finally legislating these changes. It just reflects the complacency, the she'll-be-right attitude that's become the hallmark of the coalition in government. The pace of innovation might be quick on the world stage, but it's certainly not reflected in anything the coalition does when it comes to legislation or action with respect to innovation itself. This is yet another example of that. You can trace it in almost every other instance where there's legislation designed to support innovation in this country. It has taken an extraordinary length of time to get to a point where the draft legislation is brought to the House and then responded to and put in place, in terms of legislative action, by this government. Always, the only consistency is delay and failure to act, and we really can't afford that on an international stage, where so much is occurring, where technology is being applied through the thought and consideration given by designers to attend to problems, to boost productivity, to boost economic growth, and to improve the life of communities across countries and different parts of the world. Yet again we are seeing that only lip service is given to innovation by the coalition. There is no structured, rigorous view about how innovation will be utilised for the sake of national priority, national action and national benefit. What we are seeing right now is yet another instance of delay applied by this government. Since 2013, the coalition government has had six industry ministers—and I note that the minister responsible for this legislation hasn't even bothered to actually give effect or speak to this in the House. There've been four departmental name changes and 250 days without any minister at all. Again, to say that the coalition doesn't care about Australian industry or the innovation that it generates is simply an understatement. Innovators, designers, businesses and industry rightly want their intellectual property protected. The design and related sectors contribute nearly $70 billion annually to our national economy—that's almost four per cent gross of domestic product. With the right policy settings and financial environment, Australian ideas will not only grow, they'll thrive, contributing more to our economy, creating jobs now and into the future, and improving the quality of life in this country. Since becoming the shadow minister for industry and innovation, I've had the distinct pleasure of meeting incredible Australian innovators who have used their skills and smarts to address gaps in the market or, again, to meet needs in the broader community. For example, in February, the member for Bean and I visited a fantastic local Canberra startup, Goterra. Its founder and CEO, Olympia Yarger, was a local agriculturalist who saw a need and decided to do something about it, using native fauna to deal with the issue of waste. In 2016, Olympia had an idea to reimagine waste management by repurposing food waste to produce protein. She and her team developed an innovative robotics technology platform to create controlled environments that encourage insects to consume biological waste and create high-value, low-impact protein and soil. The carbon footprint of managing food waste with Goterra's method is 97 per cent lower than landfill and better than composting, and her efforts were actually recognised in the Australian's list of top 100 Australian innovators. I commend in particular David Swan from the Australian who put that list together that highlighted the range of innovative firms that have emerged in the Australian environment. These are ideas that are locally driven, supported and making a difference in ways that people think need to occur not just now, for our own sake, but in the longer term, into the future. Further, in my own area, in the electorate of Chifley, we are home to one of the largest civil precast concrete manufacturers in Australia, Humes, part of the Holcim Group. In March, I visited their Rooty Hill operations to get an update on how they're going and the challenges they're facing as an Australian manufacturer. They create prefabricated concrete tunnelling of up to three metres in diameter, with a service life of nearly a century. Actually, it's over a century, I should point out. While I was there, Humes showed me where they've incorporated automation and new technologies in traditional manufacturing practices. They have a 130-strong workforce, many of whom live locally and who have been with the company many years. They're doing tremendous work in our part of Western Sydney and are proud contributors to Western Sydney manufacturing. I also had the chance, with the member for Eden-Monaro, to meet with Tim and Kyran Crane, the founders of Ocean2earth in Merimbula. Ocean2earth are taking recycling waste very seriously, particularly in the area of marine waste, looking for new uses for this waste that would previously have gone into landfill. Their innovations are transforming marine waste products and compost. They collect that marine waste and transform it into premium recycled gardening products, and they're looking to expand that nationwide, creating jobs and contributing to the global war on waste. Their processes, which use the same amount of energy that is used to power a lamp, pump air into waste that is then broken down and transformed. It is truly remarkable work, and the Australian government should be doing more to support people with big ideas, like Tim and Kyran. I also had the opportunity to visit the University of Newcastle's I2N innovation hub in Williamtown, with the member for Paterson, Meryl Swanson, where I got to meet a number of new firms supported through the university. Diffuse Energy, led by Joss Kesby and James Bradley, build some of the world's most powerful, small wind turbines, designed to service customers with off-grid energy requirements. Their turbines have a diameter of less than a metre and a service life of roughly 20 years. MGA Thermal showed me their brick technology that can store energy generated from heat in a safe and easy-to-use way. Dr Antony Martin of Hone Ag explained to me and Meryl Swanson how their technology can do time tests on the chemical properties of crops—a process that used to take weeks now shortened considerably. These were just some of the firms we met while on that visit. They've got some terrific innovations that the Hunter and the rest of the country can be proud of. I also had the pleasure, with the member for Dobell, of visiting a firm in Tuggerah called Bioaction, headed up by CEO Larry Botham. They specialise in the design, manufacture and installation of systems to help eliminate hazardous and corrosive elements in our wastewater system. They've done that in quite an imaginative way on the Central Coast. They're working with many local government authorities and utilities across the country, deploying renewable organic resources and natural minerals that harmonise and populate nature's natural microorganisms to destroy contaminants and to debase compounds. They are doing terrific work right there on the Central Coast, with approximately 15 employees. Again, these are Australian ideas and Australian know-how that are able to do things that are different. They are making a difference, creating jobs and improving the quality of life for Australians. I just want to congratulate them. On the issue of research and development, I think, sadly, that the coalition doesn't believe enough in Australian ideas to properly invest in them. Today's Australian investment in R&D is below that of countries such as South Korea, Iceland, Slovenia and Singapore. The cuts that started in 2014 with the abysmal Abbott-Hockey budget have seen impacts on Australian researchers, innovators and industry, who have all been suffering since. For evidence of the government's neglect, you need look no further than the 30 per cent decline in business research and development in the seven years prior to the pandemic. The government likes to tout its Modern Manufacturing Strategy, but the manufacturing industry is one of the biggest users of the R&D tax incentive. The government's continual underinvestment in R&D jeopardises Australia's manufacturing future and, importantly, the jobs it creates. You notice now that the government boasts quite regularly about a '$2 billion injection' into R&D. You need to realise that this injection is nothing more than a reversal of nearly $2 billion in cuts that they had proposed and taken to the last federal election and had had to commit a backflip on when even those in their own party rebelled against what was being put forward as a 'reform' of R&D. To have the coalition now claim that they have injected $2 billion, when this is really a reversal of the cut that had been proposed, is quite obscene and offensive to those who fought against this cut that had been touted for quite some time. But, again, this is emblematic of the Morrison government. They're there for the announcement or the re-announcement or the spin of a cut that had been proposed by them some time ago, but they're never ready to do the meaningful work to support Australian ideas and business. After the last budget, they gave themselves, as I said, a huge pat on the back for their almighty backflip on cuts to the R&D tax incentives, but they shouldn't have undertaken this in the first place. A government that believes in Australian ideas would never contemplate such a cut. My colleagues and I on this side of the House do lament the missed opportunities for innovators and businesses forced to leave Australia and the jobs lost because of the government's failure to act in the last five years. Since coming to government in 2013, the coalition has overseen the permanent loss of over 50,000 jobs in Australian manufacturing. Now, in the lead-up to the election, Mr Morrison will have the final say over funding decisions on $800 million worth of manufacturing grants. I can imagine the coloured highlighters and spreadsheets are being rolled out in preparation for decisions to which a lot of people would question whether or not merit has been applied. A lot of people would also question whether the government has applied political priorities to decision-making regarding the support of grants in this area. Again, this reflects the nature of the Morrison government, which has undertaken sports rorts, road funding rorts, regional rorts and car park rorts. Now we are genuinely concerned that they will use the same approach in making decisions around manufacturing grants, which simply should not be occurring. We should be ensuring that, coming out of the pandemic, any effort to revitalise sovereign capability and reduce our reliance on global supply chains is done in a way where government funds are used within a merit based system, considering the needs of Australian industry and engaging with it wholeheartedly—not in a way that furthers political interest for the coalition, but rather in a way that has the national interest at the centre of decision-making. We have seen, as a result of the failure to prioritise innovation and to back Australian ideas, threats of funding cuts. The way in which the RDTI had been managed put a chill in investment, particularly around areas of software development. It's no surprise, then, that if you look at the Global Innovation Index Australia's standing in that index has fallen three places since 2018, from 20th to 23rd. Australia produces fewer innovation outputs relative to its level of innovation investment, despite the fact that Australia ranks sixth according to the quality of its universities. If you look at all those issues, and the challenges confronting us, it is simply stunning that we have had reports that have driven the creation of legislation like this and that it has been dragged out; it was first committed to in 2012, the report was produced in 2015, the government response to that report was produced in 2016, and it is only in the second half of 2021 that we are looking at the legislative arrangements to give effect to that work. The failure to prioritise cleaning up design laws sends a strong message to innovators, designers, manufacturers and businesses alike that the Morrison government simply doesn't value Australian ideas and know-how and is certainly not on the side of Australian innovators. The government's own explanatory memorandum states: The objective of the intellectual property (IP) rights system is to support innovation by encouraging investment in research and technology in Australia, and by helping Australian businesses benefit from good ideas. Labor supports Australian ideas and Australian know-how. On the side we believe in Australian ingenuity. We know we've got the brightest minds and the best ideas. We know proper government investment in research and development will not only grow Australian businesses but also boost jobs. But, after eight long years, it seems those opposite cannot be convinced of the value of Australian smarts unless it can be distilled into a three-word slogan or an opportunity for political advancement of their own interests. This is not just about investing in Australian ideas; this is about investing in Australian jobs, Australian businesses and Australia's future. That is why, in his budget-in-reply speech, Anthony Albanese announced that a Labor government would offer 2,000 students what we refer to as a start-up year, to provide those students with the opportunity to partner with an accredited university accelerator to turn their ideas into future businesses. These are new ideas, new firms, new jobs and new growth that we are championing through the start-up year. Labor is confident in the potential of those ideas, particularly from young Australians, to grow new firms looking at ways in which we can reinvigorate Australia's business sector after the pummelling it has taken and the challenge that has been put on it by the pandemic. In addition, Labor's $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund is designed to help support industries to get on their feet, to boost existing ones and to support the emergence of new ones as we come out of the COVID-19 pandemic. It also looks to support economic activity and industry growth in regional Australia and to attend to the challenges of Australian underemployment, where wages growth has stagnated and where people feel that the quality of jobs on offer is not helping them meet what they want to achieve in their lives. As indicated earlier, if we are to reinvigorate Australia's sovereign capability and reduce our reliance on global supply chains, we need to have a serious investment in Australian industry. That is why the $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund proposed by Labor intends to back Australian ideas to lead the way in our economic recovery. We also want to see more Australian ideas make it on the global stage: instead of our importing the work, ideas and know-how of someone else, backing local creativity and ingenuity because it transforms businesses that can compete in international markets. We know that innovation, research and development are essential for economic growth, job creation and industry expansion. We want to ensure that in years to come we still have a reason to stand in this place and debate a bill such as this that seeks to protect the intellectual property of Australians. But to do that requires meaningful, long-term government support for R&D in this country. Only Labor can be trusted to be on the side of Australian manufacturers, researchers and innovators. Again, I note that the member for Whitlam will be moving on behalf of the opposition a second reading amendments. I indicate that Labor will be backing this bill. 12:50 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I remain deeply impressed that, for such a simple, straightforward bill, the member for Chifley found 21 minutes of diatribe to throw in and deliver to the parliament, including long discussions about Labor Party plans, should they come to government. Of course, he didn't mention one of the most critical factors of any Labor government plan, which is how it is that they will tax us into prosperity. When we're talking about issues like innovation there's been a constant criticism by those on the opposite side of this chamber about the government's approach to addressing one of the biggest challenges that our country and the global community face—in the space of climate change policy—where we have a focus on technology, not taxes. Their approach has been consistently to talk up technology but to impose taxes, because somehow they see innovation as a vehicle achieved by adding to the burden of those that want to invest and innovate in our country to utilise technology towards a better future. Now, that is not what this bill, the Designs Amendment (Advisory Council on Intellectual Property Response) Bill 2020 is about, because it is a coalition proposition. It's a coalition proposition focusing on how we empower technology and innovators to help improve the state of our nation, and not just the state of our nation and the power of technology but, more critically, the cause of humanity, because we want Australian designers to be not just Australia-best but world-best, to be able to commercialise the efforts of their innovation so as to make the investments that can improve the future for all of us and to take new ideas and new innovations through to practical effect, to development and to making them commercial in the marketplace. This bill seeks to implement recommendations from an Advisory Council on Intellectual Property report to clarify and simplify the designs system and provide more flexibility for designers. That's of critical importance because for a lot of people who operate in the space of design, truthfully, a lot of their skill isn't focused on IP law and a lot of their focus isn't actually on the commercialisation of their innovations. Their focus is on how to come up with the nucleus and the core of their designs and how they are able to use them for industrial purposes, societal purposes, environmental purposes and the like. Of course, the practical dimensions of intellectual property, and particularly the legal arrangements that operate around it, frankly bamboozle the best of us at times because of the complexity of the law, its long tradition, how it's evolved out of various international treaties and the challenge for the law to continue to meet up with and follow the pace of technological innovation and advancement. So this bill delivers timely benefits for Australian designers and improves confidence and certainty to stimulate investment in design and innovation by making sure that our designers know that the law backs them and that it provides pathways for them to secure capital and then to be able to innovate, knowing that if they come up with an idea or design that has a practical benefit it can make a significant contribution to all of us. Already, design industries contribute around $68 billion a year to the Australian economy. That's 3½ per cent of GDP, so we're not talking small bickies; we're talking big bickies in the context of the entire Australian economy. More critically, what they do is harness the potential of creativity at the heart of our economy so that we can have an innovative nation. The member who spoke before me, the member for Chifley, spoke specifically about the importance of innovation. We saw measures related to that in the most recent budget and have seen them in budgets throughout the entire time of the Morrison government, because our interest is always in what we need to do to back research and development and creative industries. It's one of the reasons there were such strong support measures during the pandemic for creative industries. We realised they play a critical part in the development of Australian GDP, a critical part in employing Australians, and a critical part in the conversation around the type of country that we have been in the past, that we are in the present and that we want to be in the future. We also want innovation to be at the core of the future of our country. Some people speak derisively of traditional industries such as agriculture and mining, and people make absurd comments like, 'Australia's just a quarry and a farm.' I hate to break it to people, but it's those industries that create the wealth that can support the industries of the future. What we see is a continuum in our economy that continues to prosper and grow off not just the natural endowments we are very privileged to have inherited but, more critically, how we can harness it so that we can build new industries for the future, harnessing the power not just of physical humanity but also its intellectual capacity. Where countries do that, where economies do that, they lift all boats and they build a better future for everybody. This legislation is but one part of the rich legislative tapestry necessary to help designers realise the benefits of their innovation and to remove burdensome red tape and needless administrative functions and obligations, as they make it impossible for people to register their designs and then commercialise them in the process, particularly around such matters as the publication of design applications without registration. Of course, it will make requests for registration automatic after six months, unless the designer indicates otherwise. So we are providing a pathway, we're providing assistance and we're making it easier for designers to reap the benefits of their innovation and design. 12:57 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam In his learned contribution, the member for Chifley said out loud, 'I'm amazed that such a simple amendment could be brought through to this House 10 years after the original report was commissioned, and some six years after it was recommended.' I find it difficult to disagree with anything that the member for Chifley says, except on this point. We should not be amazed, because a government that spent so much energy in the last election campaigning against the future is going to have very little to say on the subject of innovation. The member for Chifley pointed out the government spent 250 days without a minister responsible for innovation. It is actually worse than that. They have spent eight years in government without a policy for innovation, and the fact that this is as good as it gets is an indication that we'll see no policy on innovation into the future either. They campaigned against the future when it came to renewable energy. They campaigned against the future when it came to electric vehicles. And not only did they campaign against the future, but, when they won government, they then did their very best to ensure that they denuded our capacity to innovate. I have in mind their response to the university sector as an example of this. Over the course of this pandemic, a smart government, a government committed to innovation, would have looked at those institutions—whose singular purpose it is to educate, to train, to skill, to research—and invested in those organisations. But what did we see? Over the period of the pandemic, we have seen 20,000 jobs—20,000 jobs!—lost from the university sector. In my region alone, if you look at all of the occupations and how they have fared over the period of the pandemic, you see a very worrying picture indeed. You would think that, during the midst of a pandemic, the things a smart country would do would be to retool, to retrain and to reinvest. But in my area alone, the one occupational grouping that saw employment go backwards, not by a small amount but by a significant amount, was education—it was the education sector. There are fewer people employed in vocational education and training, in tertiary education and in school education at this point in the pandemic than there were at the beginning of it. Over the last 18 months, we have seen a hollowing out of that institution which is going to be absolutely essential to us rebuilding, innovating and ensuring that we are going to build back better once this virus is under control. We have seen 20,000 jobs and $2 billion taken out of the university sector—that is what has been lost. If you want to see the impact of that, have a look at what is happening across enrolments and what is going to happen, particularly in the vocational education and training sector. We have a skills shortage at the moment. We had a skills shortage before the pandemic, which was exacerbated by the closure of the borders. There are a lot of businesses right now saying, 'How are we going to do our planning, particularly our workforce planning, for building back after the pandemic when businesses are able to open up again?' This Prime Minister says we need hope, but he is not giving them much in the way of hope when it comes to workforce planning. The skills aren't there and the institutions, which will be building on those skills, certainly aren't there either. However, if you want to see an example of innovation at work, I want to reflect again on the innovation that is being demonstrated by some organisations in my community. Yes, we want to have an eye on the future and ensuring that we can improve our economy, our capacity, after we've got this pandemic under control. Community organisations and business organisations in my electorate have got their eye on the immediate challenge, and that is how we vax the Illawarra. I want to give a shout-out to the community organisations and the businesses that have got behind the campaign to vax the Illawarra by dealing with the immediate challenges. I want to give a shout-out to Vicki Tiegs from Waples Marketing Group and a shout-out to all of the partners behind the #VaxTheIllawarra campaign. They're very innovative indeed and they include Interchange Illawarra, The Cram Foundation, Housing Trust, Wests Illawarra, Port Kembla Golf Club, the Kembla Grange Racecourse, Peoplecare health cover—and there are so many others. There are ambassadors like UFC champion Alex Volkanovski, Australian Olympic swimming sensation Emma McKeon and Professor Patricia Davidson from Wollongong university. They're joining together in an innovative community driven and community led campaign to vax the Illawarra. Their target is 80 per cent and then 90 per cent, and their objective is ensuring that the Illawarra is the first region in the country to achieve that 80 per cent target. They have my 100 per cent support, and I'm calling on all people of the Illawarra to get behind this campaign, #VaxTheIllawarra. If we back our local community, we will be at the forefront of those regions that are able to build back and ensure we can get our economy opening up. We can then be out there doing the things that we need to do and that we were able to enjoy so much before this pandemic. I want to give a shout-out to that innovative campaign, #VaxTheIllawarra, and I give it my 100 per cent support. I want to foreshadow that I'll also be moving a second reading amendment. I know the member for Griffith, who's always forward leaning in these matters, is very keen to second this amendment. The member for Chifley said in his opening remarks that the fact that it's taken us nearly 10 years to get to this very modest amendment speaks to a government without an innovation agenda. My second reading amendment will go to the point that Australia is crying out for leadership in the area of innovation, a minister who takes it seriously, a government that takes it seriously and an agenda for innovation. I singled out renewable energy and electric vehicles as two examples, but a government that has spent so much time and energy campaigning against renewable energy can hardly be the sort of government that's going to lead us through to the sort of transformation that needs to be done to our energy generation and transmission system. Contrast that with the plan that the Albanese-led Labor opposition has put forward to the Australian people. We're getting behind a long-term renewable energy generation policy. It's energy-certain so that investors can invest in transmission and generation, rewiring our nation to ensure that the transmission system is linking up the places where the energy is being generated with the places where it's going to be used—that's absolutely critical. But batteries are also critical to this. We know that Australia is leading the world in terms of solar take-up. One in five households has solar panels on their roof, but without battery storage households are still reliant on the grid when the sun isn't shining. We know that less than one in 60 households which have had solar installed has battery storage because the up-front costs are just so prohibitive at the moment. That's why Labor's 'power to the people' program—a $200 million investment to install over 400 community batteries across the country—is an innovation that the country needs. It will support over 100,000 households by storing energy from solar households at the community level when it's being generated during the day and it can then be drawn down at night time during peak demand periods. It's these sorts of innovations that Australia needs; not just working on the generation of renewable electricity and fixing up the transition system but ensuring that we have battery storage at the point of usage as well. When it comes to batteries, I want to make this point: every single item—every single mineral—that goes into the production of batteries can be found here in Australia, and they're extracted at the sorts of volumes that are necessary to make them commercially viable. So we have to ask ourselves, 'If we're able to dig this stuff up, put it on ships and send it around to the rest of the world—which then produces the batteries and sends them back to Australia for us to buy at a premium—why have we not been able to build a battery production industry here in Australia?' This is a part of the energy revolution that Australia needs. A government which was committed to innovation would have put in place the sorts of industry plans and incentives which would enable us to be world leaders and innovators, not only in the mining of the minerals which are necessary for the production of batteries but by building a domestic battery program as well. Whether it's maximising and being able to utilise the mineral benefits that we have in this country, or whether it's being able to harness the creativity and potential of the Australian people, this government is without an agenda. It has no agenda for vocational education and training and is at war with the universities—as it's at war with so many other aspects of our society. It's at war with the university sector and it has completely vacated the territory in the area of vocational education and training, withdrawing funds and capacity when they're most needed. And it's absent when it comes to developing an industry policy around battery storage, energy generation and energy transmission. These are just two examples; I could list many, many more. With those comments in mind, I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:    (1) notes the lack of Government strategy on innovation; and    (2) condemns the Government for its continued failure to support innovation in Australia". That amendment has been circulated in my name and I commend that amendment to all members of the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 53517 Is the amendment seconded? Ms Butler 248006 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. 13:10 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner Thank you for the call, Deputy Speaker Dick, and can I formally congratulate you on being a member of the Speaker's panel. I wish you all the very best in the future. I rise today to speak in support of the Designs Amendment (Advisory Council on Intellectual Property Response) Bill 2020, a bill which will improve Australia's intellectual property system and a bill critical to fostering the innovation of the 1.3 million Australians working in our design intensive industries. Intellectual property is incredibly varied, spanning trademarks, trade secrets, patents and copyrights. It is often the lifeblood of what differentiates a business offering involving great ideas built on visions—ideas which must be protected and not put at risk of intellectual property theft. But, unfortunately, when there is a great idea there will always be people wanting to replicate it and make it their own, and it's all the easier to do this in the digital age. For small-business designers especially, the risk can be so detrimental, with the potential to significantly affect their market share and revenue, not to mention derailing the hard work and effort that goes into developing their own unique business ideas. In response to a report by the former Advisory Council on Intellectual Property, this bill seeks to protect and encourage our designers to create new innovative products with confidence. It seeks to make absolutely certain that they can benefit from their creative investment. Implementing measures from the report, this bill will clarify and simplify the design systems and provide more flexibility for designers. It will improve the registered design system to support this important sector, which is estimated to contribute $68 billion to the economy every year. Our government has consulted extensively to put the report's recommendations into effect. We are confident that this bill's measures strike the right balance between the needs of designers, third parties and the broader public. Amongst the changes made by the bill is the inclusion of a grace period. Currently, if a designer publicly discloses their design before applying for protection, they will never be able to obtain a registered and enforceable IP right. This grace period will give designers 12 months to apply for protection after publicly using their design. It aligns Australia with many of our major trading partners, making it easier for our designers to seek protection overseas and encouraging international designers to bring their work to Australia. It will also increase competitiveness in export markets. For Australian businesses that have licensed exclusive rights for a design, they will now be able to bring infringement action without needing to rely on the owner. When an exclusive licence is granted, it can be in circumstances where the design owner is based overseas. This bill will allow exclusive licensees to enforce their rights that they have paid for, and is already the case for patents, trademarks and plant breeders' rights. As well as delivering benefits for designers, the bill will also implement safeguards to protect third parties in the design sector who are operating in good faith. A prior use exemption to the infringement of designs will be created. It will safeguard those who start using or preparing to use a design in good faith during the grace period before the designer seeks to register it. This bill will extend the current innocent infringer defence so that relief is available from any time after the designer's filing date. The amendments will mitigate the risk of infringing a design during this period for those acting in good faith. The defence will only be available to those genuinely unaware of the design protection. Designers will be able to advertise their design protection and take legal action against deliberate copiers. Finally, the bill will also streamline the designs application process, reducing red tape and the administrative burden for designers. It will remove the rarely used option to publish a design application without registration. It will make requests for registration automatic after six months unless the designer indicates otherwise. This will reduce the number of dates that are needed to be tracked by applicants, and it will make it easier and simpler for them to delay publication of a new design until they are ready to launch in the market. The bill will also make a range of smaller technical corrections and improvements to the design system, streamlining the process for updating design application filing requirements and ensuring the requirements can be easily amended to reflect changing technology and commercial practices. This bill will improve procedural fairness, clarify third parties' freedom to operate and reduce legal uncertainty. It will make sure new business ventures see their innovations and creativity transformed into market share, successfully setting themselves up for expansion, protecting what is theirs and achieving profitable returns. Our government is committed to supporting our businesses to go from strength to strength, giving them the access to the resources to do so confidently and with maximum assurance, especially during this time. That is why I commend this bill to the House. 13:15 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest I thank members for their contributions to the debate. In preparing this bill, the government heard from many stakeholders in the designs industry, including designers, design owners, industry groups and their representatives. They had many different perspectives and interests, but they were united in their passion for creating great designs and sharing them with the world. This bill will support Australians working in design-intensive industries and give designers confidence to create new and innovative products, knowing their creative investment will be protected and rewarded. This bill will improve the registered design system to support this important sector. These reforms will clarify and simplify the registered design system, reduce red tape and give more designers more flexibility when seeking intellectual property protection. This bill responds to a report by the former Advisory Council on Intellectual Property that considered the effectiveness of the design's system in stimulating innovation and its impact on economic growth. This will deliver benefits for Australian designers, improving confidence and certainty to stimulate investment in design innovation. Thanks to the input from designers, industry groups, intellectual property practitioners and other experts, I'm confident that we have struck the right balance between the needs of designers, third parties and the broader public. This bill will implement a grace period that will allow designers to apply for protection for up to 12 months after a design is disclosed, preventing any loss of rights. It will align Australia with our major trading partners, making it easier for our designers to seek protection overseas and encouraging international designers to bring their work to Australia. Along with this, the bill will also include a prior use infringement exemption to protect those who start using or preparing to use a design in good faith during a designer's grace period. The bill will also allow exclusive licensees to enforce the rights that they have paid for, as is already the case for patents, trademarks and plant breeders' rights, and reflects that when an exclusive licence is granted that can be in circumstances where the design owner is based overseas may be less willing to pursue an alleged infringer in Australia. The bill will also extend the current innocent infringer defence to cover the period between filing a design application and registration as well as streamline the design's application process and the process for updating designed application filings. The Australian designer sector contributes greatly to our economy. This bill will deliver a more fit-for-purpose design and a design right to support and stimulate design activity in Australia. I commend the bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 53517 I thank the minister. The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Whitlam has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question before the House is that the amendment to be disagreed to. Question agreed to. Original question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 39 13:20 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest by leave—I move: That this bill now be read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021 39

Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021

Second Reading 39 13:20 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest I present the revised explanatory memorandum to this bill and move: That this bill now be read a second time. The Australian government takes the violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disability very seriously. All forms of violence against, and abuse, neglect and exploitation of, people with disability are abhorrent. This is why the government committed $527.9 million for this royal commission, which includes funding to support people with disability to participate in the royal commission. The success of this commission is important for ensuring better outcomes for people with disability now and into the future. The Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021 introduces explicit confidentiality protections for sensitive information being given to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability. It implements the changes which have been requested by the Chair of the Disability Royal Commission, the Hon. Ronald Sackville AO QC. The protections have also been requested by people with disability, in support of the chair's request, and a range of disability advocates. Expanded confidentiality protections in the bill will ensure that people with disability have the confidence to fully engage and tell their story to the disability royal commission without fear of reprisal or future disclosure of their personal sensitive information. The protections will be extended to cover situations where information is given to the royal commission on behalf of another person and also to cover accounts of systemic violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation. When the royal commission ends, its records will be held by the Australian government Attorney-General's Department. Upon transfer, some of those records may then be sought under court-issued subpoenas or other compulsory processes, or be the subject of freedom of information requests unless exemptions or protections apply. The chair of the royal commission has said to the government that people with disability, their families, and supporters, among others, do not feel confident that the information they provide to the royal commission can remain confidential after the royal commission ends. These amendments will strengthen the existing protections in the act, and remove any doubt about the safeguarding of confidential information beyond the life of the inquiry. The royal commission's letters patent stipulate that people with disability are central to processes that inform best practice decision-making on what all Australian governments and others can do to prevent and respond to violence against, and abuse, neglect and exploitation of, people with disability. Ensuring they are heard in this inquiry is key. The government has listened to the royal commission, and people with disability, their families and carers, and the broader Australian public, about the importance of ensuring people have the confidence to come forward and tell their story. Existing protections in the royal commissions act For many people with disability, and their families and carers, telling their story to the royal commission may be the first time in their lives they have disclosed their experiences of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation. For others, it's the first time their story has been heard by someone in a position of authority. People telling their stories to the royal commission need to know there are existing protections in the act, and that the government is doing more to expressly set out these comprehensive protections for personal information both during the life of the royal commission and after its conclusion. The amendments will build upon the strong protections that already apply to royal commissions whilst an inquiry is underway. This includes providing for private sessions, the use of pseudonyms in public hearings and published material and through the making of non-publication directions. All of these allow for identities and other information to be protected. This bill will ensure that people with disability have an extra layer of confidence to engage with the royal commission with certainty that their information will be protected. We want people to come forward and tell the royal commission what has happened to them, and what they've seen. Operation of confidentiality provisions The bill amends the act to ensure that confidentiality of certain information given by, or on behalf of individuals, to the disability royal commission by applying limitations on the use and disclosure of information given by individuals to the royal commission about their, or others, experiences of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation, where that information was given for purposes other than a private session and the information was treated as confidential by the commission at all times. Private sessions were first established for the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (the child sexual abuse royal commission) to enable individuals to tell their story about matters into which the commission was inquiring in a trauma informed and less formal setting than a hearing. These private session records are already fully protected after the inquiry ends, but this bill will extend these important protections to other categories of sensitive information. Private sessions are an important mechanism that enable individuals to share highly sensitive and personal information in confidence, which is why the government is seeking to extend those protections to individuals engaging with the disability royal commission who are providing individual or systemic accounts of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation on a confidential basis. Individuals have and will provide sensitive and highly personal information outside of a private sessions to the disability royal commission, expecting that it will be kept confidential. In practice, information about an individual's experience can be received and recorded by a commission outside of a private session. For example, by providing confidential written submissions and accounts, or through interview processes where the royal commission needs to be satisfied that the matters fall within the terms of the inquiry or they need to discuss potential giving of evidence. This information should properly receive protections similar to private session information, and this is what this bill will achieve. The proposed new clause 6OP would provide that confidential information is not admissible in evidence against a natural person in any civil or criminal proceedings in any court of the Commonwealth, of a state or of a territory. Further, a provision of a law of the Commonwealth, a state or a territory would have no effect to the extent that it would otherwise require or authorise a person to make a record of, use or disclose the information. Proposed amendments to section 60E will expand the application of the existing protections in the act to cover circumstances where information is given to the disability royal commission by a person on behalf of another person—for example, where a carer or parent gives information on behalf of a person with a cognitive or severe disability. In these circumstances, both the person with the disability and the person giving information on their behalf would be protected. The disability royal commission may hear accounts of systemic violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disabilities, not just individual accounts, including accounts which indirectly identify a person. This could include information a person knows about policies, procedures, practices, acts or omissions that may have contributed to a person experiencing violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 Order! 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 41 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Workplace Relations 41 13:30 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley [by video link] Back in July, a local worker named Chris Smith came to my mobile office at Banyo and asked me to sign a pledge of support for local Toll Group workers, who are heading to Fair Work to protect their job security, work conditions and industry standards. Last Thursday night, two hours after my home quarantine finished at midnight, I stuck by my word to Chris and proudly stood, shoulder to shoulder, with Toll workers and Transport Workers Union delegates at the Brisbane Airport as they walked off the job site at midnight to begin a 24-hour strike. During the pandemic, our delivery drivers and truckies have put their lives on the line to keep our country moving and to deliver food, PPE and vaccines. They have kept our country and our economy in motion when our brick-and-mortar shops have closed in lockdown. Instead of rewarding their workers with job security and safe working conditions, Toll is planning to sell them out in a bid to compete in a race to the bottom with exploitative models like Amazon Flex. Toll is trying to do what Qantas tried and failed to do to my aviation workers: scrap their working entitlements and engage outside workers on minimal pay and with fewer rights. On behalf of my transport workers, aviation workers and all north-side workers, we know that only a Labor government would implement the same job, same pay policy that will actually improve job security for hardworking north-siders; that's what they deserve. (Time expired) Tokyo Paralympic Games 41 13:32 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina There are 179 Australians competing in the Paralympics in Tokyo, including Riverina products Ashley Van Rijswijk and Scott Reardon. Young Ashley, a Wagga Wagga Swim Club member, swam fifth place in the 100-metre breaststroke SB14 women's final last night and will compete again tomorrow in the 200-metre medley SM14 on what will be her 21st birthday. This is her first Paralympics. Temora's own Paralympian, Scott Reardon, will be running for gold tonight in the men's T63 100-metre final. He is the defending Paralympic champion. Injured in a farm accident when he was just 12, the now 31-year-old won gold in Rio de Janeiro in 2016 and silver in London in 2012. Australian Olympians are given cash prizes—$20,000 for gold, $15,000 for silver and $10,000 for bronze—but no such financial reward goes to our Paralympians. As one Paralympian said: We only get money from the government if we win a medal at a world championship. It's hard to work and train at the same time. I hope our success and how hard we work is enough to show Australia that we are worth investing in a little bit more. The United States of America and a number of other countries moved to award their Paralympic athletes with the same cash prizes as Olympians, and at this year's games, and the movement has been widely celebrated. Our Paralympians work at least as hard as our Olympians and deserve the same treatment. JobKeeper Payment 42 13:33 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley [by video link] Every day someone in my community contacts me because they're struggling to make ends meet. These are people who have worked so hard to support themselves and their families before COVID hit and who have been hit really hard by the pandemic. We can just imagine how they feel when they learn that between April and September last year the Morrison government gave $13 billion to corporate firms and businesses that were not only not struggling but which increased their turnover. By mid last year the Prime Minister and the Treasurer had been told by the Treasury that billions of dollars of JobKeeper were going to firms with rising revenue, like Best&Less, Premier Investments and Access Group. But apparently that's fine; they can pocket that money and keep on paying CEO bonuses. We can imagine how my community feel when they hear the Treasurer say: 'Oh well, there's no way to make them pay it back. They haven't done anything wrong.' But when it comes to people in my community who haven't done anything wrong, the government doesn't waste a second in making them pay back JobKeeper. These are disability pensioners, like part-time disability support worker Denise, who is paying back a thousand dollars over 12 months; single-parent pensioners, like drama teacher Jess, who received notice of three debts from JobKeeper despite declaring her JobKeeper income every fortnight; and age pensioners, like part-time teacher Jan, who's happy to pay back what she owes but who said, 'How is it fair when big businesses don't have to?' It's not fair, Jan, it's not fair at all. (Time expired) Queensland: Crime 42 13:35 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson The Queensland Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, says she is protecting Queenslanders from COVID-19 with her business-destroying border closures, but her government has failed miserably to protect Queenslanders from skyrocketing crime rates. Under the Premier's watch, crime—in particular, juvenile crime—has spiralled out of control. The statistics from 2015 to 2020 show that juvenile assaults are up by 47 per cent, juvenile break-ins are up by 51 per cent, juvenile robberies are up by 183 per cent and juvenile motor vehicle offences are up by 158 per cent. Sadly, our regional towns are bearing the brunt, with the numbers showing that juvenile assaults are up by 78 per cent in Townsville and by 98 per cent in Mackay. The Queensland government has had more than six years to fix this issue, but it keeps getting worse. Queenslanders are fed up; we have already seen that playing out through acts of vigilantism. Our people are just not being protected. We need policies that support the victims, not the perpetrators. We should be aiming, first, to protect the community and, second, to reform the individual. Boot camps would remove juvenile criminals from the community, instil discipline and teach the value of hard work and productivity. If the Premier can build a quarantine facility near Toowoomba to imprison people for the crime of travelling within their own country, why is she not willing to build a boot camp for juvenile criminals who are destroying our communities and, in some cases, taking lives? (Time expired) Afghanistan 42 13:36 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon [by video link] I'm sure all Australians have watched in horror the recent events in Afghanistan. They are terrible for every single resident of Afghanistan, but they are particularly terrible for minorities in Afghanistan, and today I want to talk in particular of the Hazara community. Members of the Hazara community in Afghanistan have been oppressed for many, many decades, but they were starting to turn the corner—to take on education and to take on roles in the government and in the military. All that has ended with the return of the Taliban. Of course, there is a Hazara community here in Australia. I was very honoured to meet with some leaders of the Hazara community last week, led by Reza Rayan and members of the Kateb Hazara community. They have asked to be remembered to the Australian parliament, as they should be. Of course, we are practically limited in what support we can provide; everybody understands that. But one thing we can do for Hazaras in Australia is remove them from temporary protection visas. Does anybody in the Morrison government seriously argue that they will be returning people to Afghanistan at any point in the future, whether they be Hazaras or other refugees? They cannot argue that; they cannot make that point. Therefore, people who are found to be refugees should be taken off temporary protection visas and given permanent residency. That is a practical step that can be taken today to support members of the Hazara community and other members of the Afghan community in Australia. It should be done. (Time expired) Chisholm Electorate: Power Neighbourhood House 43 13:38 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm A few weeks ago, prior to lockdown restrictions, it was absolutely fantastic to visit local superstar Carol at Power Neighbourhood House in Ashwood with the Minister for Families and Social Services, Senator Anne Ruston. Power Neighbourhood House provides a number of affordable activities and programs aimed at enriching the lives of all in our community, regardless of age, ability or ethnicity. They do absolutely incredible work locally, providing a safe and supportive environment for those who need it, as well as connecting locals with support providers, including community housing, social services, community health centres and more. The government is backing Carol and her team at Power Neighbourhood House with a grant of $15,000 to make crucial upgrades to their facilities. The funding was delivered through the Stronger Communities Program. The grant will help Power Neighbourhood House to continue their incredible work supporting local families, our multicultural communities and some of the most vulnerable members of our community. (Time expired) Oxley Electorate: Queensland Country Women's Association 43 13:39 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I rise today to acknowledge the 75th anniversary of a beloved Oxley community organisation: the Oxley Queensland Country Women's Association. This fantastic team of women has been serving our community for three-quarters of a century, including through fetes, raising money for charity and serving up some delicious cakes, all in the name of a good cause. The QCWA connects women from all around our region and is defined by its dedication to empowering women and inspiring friendship through a connection to community and advocacy for important issues. I'm honoured to be a supporter of an organisation with such a rich and inspiring history and have constantly been in awe of their dedication to our community. I want to acknowledge in particular, for almost 63 years of service, Mrs Jean Harrop of the Oxley QCWA. Jean first joined the association in 1958 in Inala before moving to Oxley when the Inala branch closed in 1972. During her leadership of the Oxley branch, it's become well known for its 'cent auctions', musical concerts and, of course, social inclusion, providing a popular social activity for many in the Oxley community. Regrettably, I cannot be with the Oxley branch today as they celebrate their birthday with a morning tea—an event that I'm sure will be filled with good music, great food and an unmatched sense of pride in our community. Thank you to Belinda, Bronwyn, Sally, Pat, Gail and Lisa for all that you do and are doing to build this organisation into the future. I'm a proud supporter of you and the work that you do, and I look forward to many morning teas come. Cowper Electorate: Volunteer Awards 43 13:41 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper Across Australia there are over 4.9 million registered volunteers, with their collective efforts quietly equating to approximately $290 billion to the economy each year. With devastating floods and the never-ending disruptions and uncertainty of COVID, it's been especially tough in my electorate of Cowper. Our local volunteers have gone above and beyond to show what community spirit means. Last week the lockdowns couldn't stop the ability to celebrate our volunteers at the Mid North Coast and upper North Coast ceremonies for the 2021 New South Wales volunteer awards. I was pleased to be able to attend these two important events via Zoom and recognise those who selflessly donate their time and efforts. I'd like to congratulate all the nominees, and particular congratulations go to those taking out the top honours in their categories. Volunteer of the Year went to Carlos Peters on the Mid North Coast and Frazer Shepherd on the upper North Coast. Volunteer Team of the Year went to the Vinnies Hastings drivers on the Mid North Coast and Vinnies Bellingen shop for the upper North Coast. Club Volunteer of the Year went to Club Taree Community Team on the Mid North Coast. Last but not least, Senior Volunteer of the Year was awarded to the amazing Helen Mears of Coffs Harbour. Thanks to you all for your outstanding contribution to our communities. (Time expired) COVID-19: New South Wales 43 13:43 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa Two weeks ago the Premier of New South Wales announced a further series of restrictions to combat the runaway delta outbreak. These restrictions now require workers in Werriwa to have a permit to go to work. As with previous announcements, there was scant detail about how this would work. Inevitably, this announcement caused a flurry of chaos and confusion. The state government, in its arrogance, got around to clearing up the confusion over the following days. In the intervening time, we had workers convinced they either wouldn't have a job or would be unable to go to their job because it's outside their LGA. They fear fines and imprisonment but also, more disturbingly, poverty. My constituents are ready to do their bit; they have been since the crisis began. However, the New South Wales government continues to put hurdles in the way. Despite announcing the permits the week before, the application was only made available last Thursday evening prior to implementation. Inevitably, the demand caused the application on the Service NSW site to crash. With each confusing announcement and botched delivery, the people become more wary, cynical and fatigued. It is time the state government got these things right. Lives are at stake, and their ineptitude is causing unnecessary stress for my community. COVID-19: Vaccination 44 13:44 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt Far North Queenslanders have answered the call and rolled up their sleeves in record numbers to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. They know the vaccine is the best defence to protect themselves, their families, their loved ones and their communities from COVID-19. They also know that the 70 per cent to 80 per cent vaccination target is the catalyst for learning to live with the virus, kick-starting their tourism sector and getting back to living their lives. More than 52 per cent of people living in the Cairns Regional Council local government area have received the first jab, including myself and my beautiful wife, and 34 per cent are fully vaccinated. In the Douglas Shire Council local government area, 50.6 per cent of people have received their first dose, while 30.4 per cent are fully vaccinated. In the Mareeba Shire Council, which takes in Kuranda in my electorate, 43 per cent of the people have received their first dose and 25 per cent are fully vaccinated. The vaccine rollout is continuing in earnest throughout the cape. This week residents living in Weipa, Napranum and Mapoon will have access to their first Pfizer dose, while residence in Bamaga will start receiving their second. Next week, residents in Coen, Weipa, Kowanyama and Lockhart will start receiving their second dose. The uptake in these communities is very strong, and it shows that Far North Queenslanders are doing their bit to ensure vaccine targets are being met. Climate Change 44 13:46 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne [by video link] The world's scientists have told us again recently that the climate crisis is at code red, and there's simply no room for any new coal, oil or gas. So how did the Liberal and Labor parties respond? In the Senate, Labor voted with the Liberals to give big gas corporations $50 million of public money to open up a new project and frack for gas in the Northern Territory. What's worse is that, if Labor had voted with us instead, we could have stopped the government. We had the numbers. But in a climate crisis, the Liberals, and now, sadly, Labor it appears, want more coal, oil and gas. This is criminal. Gas is as dirty as coal. Sixty-four years worth of Australia's pollution is stored underground in the NT, and that is exactly where it should stay, because unlocking toxic methane from the Beetaloo basin will light the fuse on a climate bomb much bigger than the Adani coal mine. People want climate action and they want more of it, not less. Today a poll commissioned by the Australian Conservation Foundation found a majority of Australians in every single seat want more action on the climate crisis. People are worried. People are angry. No-one wants a gas-fired country or for their future to be held to ransom. They want renewables. They want a healthy environment today, tomorrow and for generations to come. But as Liberals and, sadly, Labor want more coal, oil and gas, it's clear we need to turf out this rotten government and give the Greens the balance of power to push the next government to act on the climate crisis. Xuereb, Ms Gloria 44 13:47 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar [by video link] I rise today to acknowledge the significant contributions of Gloria Xuereb, who has demonstrated a life of dedicated service within our community of Mackellar through countless hours of volunteering and serving others. Gloria has volunteered tirelessly at the Avalon Red Cross for nearly 20 years, and currently spends three days a week sorting and pricing items. Her work does not stop when she leaves. She is known to take home items to clean and restore at her kitchen table, ensuring they can be sold in the best possible condition. Volunteering for the bushfire brigade in Terrey Hills for 15 years, Gloria quickly responds to calls, which require her to drop everything to cook hundreds of meals for firefighters. She has also shared these skills by volunteering at a Men's Shed, where she taught the members how to cook. Gloria also served as the social director of the Probus club at Palm Beach, organising events and often donating her own money to buy Christmas presents to ensure no member went without. I am proud to acknowledge the extensive efforts of people like Gloria in her service to numerous community organisations, and I admire her generosity in caring for each individual member. Defence Equipment 44 13:49 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin Eight years after the coalition came into government, the replacement submarine program is still clouded in uncertainty and secrecy. It has been a similar story with the Collins class full-cycle docking work, which has also become a debacle. Defence experts continue to raise legitimate questions about the new submarine design, the contractual arrangements and the delivery timetable. In a clear acknowledgement of the fiasco, the defence minister has now announced that, to avoid a capability gap, the life of the Collins class submarines will be extended by a decade at a reported cost of between $6 billion and $10 billion. Work on the first replacement submarines is expected to commence in 2025—that is, 12 years after the coalition came to office—and to be completed in around 2035. The cost, which started out $20 billion under the Abbott government and then went to $50 billion, has now blown out to $89 billion. Every single major national project for which the Morrison government has had responsibility has been a disaster—the NBN, the NDIS, aged care, and now the COVID vaccination and national quarantine system. The Morrison government's incompetence is costing billions of dollars and leaving Australia vulnerable, and the Morrison government's political spin is wearing thin. Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Offences and Preventing Multiple Voting) Bill 2021 45 13:50 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby Today I wish to commend the parliament for the quick passage of the Electoral Legislation Amendment (Electoral Offences and Preventing Multiple Voting) Bill 2021. I feel immensely proud to have in my small way made a contribution to the provisions of this legislation that relate to the safety of candidates, members of parliament, staff and volunteers. The act clarifies what constitutes interference with political liberty and notes that violence, obscene or discriminatory abuse, property damage and harassment or stalking with relevance to an election are examples of what can be considered interference with political liberty, with penalties of imprisonment for three years or of 100 penalty units or both. Unfortunately, as I have previously recorded in this place, I was subjected to all of this during the 2019 election campaign and since from Extinction Rebellion and groups like that. No-one in politics, especially women, should have to go through this, and now we finally have a way to protect the safety of our participants in our democracy. I would like again to record my sincere thanks to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters for allowing me to participate in the inquiry, to the member for Barker and Senator Eric Abetz for their forensic analysis of the GetUp, Labor and union tactics and also to the Assistant Minister for Electoral Matters and his office and his department for drafting the legislation. The future of our democracy and continuing free and easy access to members of parliament depends on all of us being safe. COVID-19: New South Wales Government 45 13:52 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur There have been almost 1,300 new community acquired cases of COVID-19 in New South Wales today. There are spikes in the eastern suburbs and on the north shore, yet the New South Wales Premier and the health minister have said that workers in those areas will be asked to make sure they're complying with COVID-specific safety measures. Yet in the west and south-west and in my electorate of Macarthur workers are being forced to apply for permits—which they can't even navigate the website to get—in order to move out of their areas for work. The New South Wales government is providing funding for an extension of a cycleway in the eastern suburbs, costing millions of dollars, for those workers who have to go to work from the eastern suburbs into the city. Unfortunately, this is a New South Wales Liberal-Nationals government that doesn't treat this like we're all in it together. It is highly discriminatory in its policy and is putting people at risk of mental health issues, with lack of health care, and of poor outcomes because of its highly differential and discriminatory policies in this pandemic. Clearly, the New South Wales government doesn't think we're all in it together and is happy to provide such discriminatory policies to Sydney and the rest of New South Wales. It must do better. Moore Electorate: COVID-19 45 13:53 Mr GOODENOUGH 74046 Moore On behalf of the community of Moore, I take this opportunity to express our collective appreciation to all of the frontline healthcare workers and medical professionals involved in the vaccination rollout, COVID testing and delivery of health services as we navigate this pandemic together. In particular, I recognise the work of the staff of the testing clinic located at Joondalup hospital, who have conducted thousands of screening tests to keep our community safe. I also commend the staff at the immunisation centres based at Lakeside shopping centre, local GP clinics and medical centres, who are efficiently administering vaccines to thousands of local residents. We recognise that your work can at times be challenging as you interact with anxious and frustrated members of the public in a stressful environment with often long queues. Today in parliament I formally recognise your service, commitment to duty and professionalism. I'm very honoured to represent a diverse community made up of civic minded people who are overwhelmingly willing to do the right thing by their fellow Australians and ensure that we will get through this pandemic together. COVID-19: Arts and Entertainment Industry 46 13:54 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie The Hawkesbury and Blue Mountains are full of creatives—from Katoomba to Kurrajong Heights, from Richmond to Glenbrook, and everywhere in between. You've got musicians, performers, people putting on events and festivals. You've got the organisers and the producers, plus those who are on stage. The hit that this sector has taken means it's even harder for them to plan for when restrictions begin to lift. Under best-case scenarios no-one expects things will suddenly open and stay open. They need a guarantee so they can plan with confidence but have a safety net, should COVID affect their live event. Their upfront costs are huge—venues, sets, staging, marketing—and that's before you get to the people on the stage or those shining a light on them. This government needs to start looking ahead, not just with empty words but with tangible supports to make it a smooth transition. For the arts and entertainment sector, that means a live-performance insurance fund backed by the federal government. There's one for the screen industry, and it's contributed to by the industry. It reduces risk and it enhances risk-taking. That's what it takes to get live performances and events happening—imagination, determination and a leap of faith. Audiences are desperate to have events to look forward to. The industry is desperate to get back on stage. It just needs government support to make it happen. Curtin Electorate: Aged-Care and Disability Services 46 13:56 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I recently had the opportunity to visit Alinea, a leading provider of aged- care and disability services in our community, and see the various goods and services they provide through their commercial division, ParaQuad Industries. Formerly known as the Spine and Limb Foundation, Alinea was established in 2012 as the amalgamation of the Paraplegic-Quadriplegic Association of WA Inc., founded in 1955, and the Civilian Maimed and Limbless Association of Western Australia, founded in 1945. ParaQuad Industries is a registered Australian disability enterprise employing and supporting approximately 150 people living with disabilities to develop their skills and abilities, while providing customers with the highest quality goods and services. The organisation's services include general packaging, recycling, picture framing, an op shop, a book bazaar, as well as a donation point for household goods and clothing. ParaQuad Industries is also working with Return-It for the WA Container Deposit Scheme to host and jointly operate the Shenton Park refund point. The refund point currently offers part-time employment to seven Western Australians with disabilities. I encourage my local community to collect and return their containers in order to support our local environment by reducing littering and plastic waste in landfill while also supporting charitable endeavours. COVID-19 46 13:57 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam We thank the nurses and doctors, the ambos and orderlies, in fact all of the workers on the front line of our healthcare crisis. Today is another record day, with 1,290 cases in New South Wales alone. There are alarming reports of nurses in understaffed hospitals having to sedate patients on ventilators to manage workloads. This is not okay. The New South Wales Premier, who describes the Prime Minister as 'an evil bully', says things are only going to get worse. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer are campaigning against premiers and public safety at the very time that our ICUs are in danger of being swamped. This is not a battle between freedom and tyranny. We all want freedom. This is a battle between the Prime Minister's incompetence and the nurses and doctors who have to clean up after him; and the small businesses who struggle to stay afloat and the big businesses competing against them getting $13 billion in JobKeeper subsidies that they didn't need. The Prime Minister says we have to make a choice—a choice between hope for the future and holding him to account. Australians aren't mugs. We hope for a better future, and we'll work to keep him to account for his catastrophic failures. Broadcasting Regulations, Afghanistan, COVID-19: Vaccination 46 13:59 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman [by video link] I call, first, for a national broadcasting ombudsman today. After recent revelations and honest errors, it's time we have an ombudsman that can hear complaints. Secondly, we need some better arrangements for our Afghan arrivals to make sure they're connected to the workforce. We must do it differently to the way we've done it up until now. Lastly, with the recent calls for no-jab, no-job and no-jab, no-shot, I'm firmly saying we have laws in this country to adhere to and public health experts we should listen to. Let's not put the decisions on who can trade or work in the hands of individual baristas and shoe shop owners. This is a matter for expert public health evidence. Let's follow the AHPPC in these matters. The SPEAKER 00APG In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 47 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Gallacher, Senator Alexander McEachian (Alex) 47 14:00 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook The Leader of the Opposition and I discussed this earlier today. All on this side of the House and, I'm sure, all across the whole House and in the other chamber, which is adjourning, are deeply saddened by the very sad news of the passing of Senator Alex Gallacher. Senator Gallacher served in this parliament for 10 years. Born in Scotland, his father headed out here, in Senator Gallacher's own words, for 'a better chance for himself and his family'. That's what this country is all about. That's the country he served. I know members will want to gather their thoughts and to pay a complete tribute to Senator Gallacher in the next few days and for there to be all condolences and honours due to a serving member of the parliament. We will indeed do that. We will honour this servant of Australia—a man who loved his adopted country, who loved the party he served and was faithful to it and who found purpose in serving others in our parliament. To all in the Labor movement and the caucus, to the Leader of the Opposition and particularly to those from South Australia: we extend our deepest sympathies to all of you. To Senator Gallacher's family: we send our love and prayers to you on this terrible day. May God bless him. May God bless all of you. And may our colleague and friend rest in peace. A motion will be moved tomorrow which will provide the opportunity for members to speak to that motion. Here today we simply acknowledge him and thank him for his wonderful service. We remember him and what he's done for our country and we think of his family most of all. 14:02 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the Prime Minister for his warm words and for his message of condolence. It is, indeed, sad news—the passing of a sitting senator, Senator Alex Gallacher. Alex represented South Australia in the Senate since 2010. He was born in Scotland on the first day of 1954 and came to Australia 12 years later with his parents, like so many migrants, to seek a better life. Alex dedicated his life to the interests of working people both as a trade unionist and as a senator. He came to this parliament with 17 years of experience of hard, physical work as a labourer and a truck driver as well as a ramp services operator at Trans Australia Airlines. He joined Labor in Darwin in 1988, when he also began to work for his beloved Transport Workers Union, where he became the secretary of the South Australian/Northern Territory branch. In his first speech in the Senate, he named his priorities as the transport sector, superannuation and road safety. In that speech we saw a glimpse of Alex's humility, as he spoke of his love for the transport sector and the people who worked in it. He said this: There is no smoke and mirrors, just plain-talking, hardworking employees and employers alike in a tough, competitive industry which works harder than most people imagine and continues to work while most people are asleep. Alex's career was, indeed, a fine one. We in Labor are very proud of Alex. He was a conscientious, no-nonsense man who knew what he stood for. Along with his mate 'Sterlie', he was a long-time member of the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport committee. He particularly prioritised road safety for those people in the transport sector who keep our country going and who during COVID have continued to keep our country going. Alex was also a family man who was dedicated to his wife, Paola, and also to his children and grandchildren. In that first speech, he quoted US President Theodore Roosevelt, who said: Far and away the best prize life has to offer is the chance to work hard at work worth doing. Alex did that. He did that as a working man, as a truck driver in the transport sector, as a transport union official and then as a senator. On behalf of the Australian Labor Party, for which he was a dedicated member and which he loved and truly served completely every day, we express our condolences to his family and to his friends. May he rest in peace. We will have an opportunity to more formally honour Senator Gallacher tomorrow. The SPEAKER 00APG As a mark of respect, I ask all present to rise in their places. Honourable members having stood in their places— The SPEAKER 00APG I thank the House. MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS 47 MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS 14:05 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I inform the House that the Minister for Agriculture and Northern Australia will be absent for question time today and the remainder of the week. The Deputy Prime Minister will answer questions on his behalf. The Assistant Treasurer will also be absent for question time today and the remainder of the week. The Treasurer will answer questions on his behalf. The Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs will be absent for question time today and the remainder of the week. The Minister for Home Affairs will answer questions on his behalf. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 48 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE COVID-19: Lockdowns 48 14:05 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister. Today is another record day of COVID cases, with 1,290 new cases in New South Wales alone. There are 840 people in hospital in New South Wales, with 137 of those in intensive care. The Prime Minister congratulated the New South Wales Premier for not locking down Bondi at the start of an outbreak which has now spread to Victoria, here in Canberra and New Zealand. Was this a mistake? 14:06 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook Those matters have already been addressed by me and the Premier of New South Wales. I note also today, with the onset of the delta outbreak, that it has impacted on not only New South Wales but also Victoria and, indeed, the Australian Capital Territory, where we are right now. As cases continue to grow, and if you look at the epidemiological curve for Victoria—it's in the Financial Review today—and compare it to what's happening in New South Wales, you'll see a very similar profile. We hope with the measures that the Victorian government has taken that that curve will indeed bend in the weeks ahead. We certainly hope that that is the case. But what we do know is that the Delta strain has been unlike every other element of this virus that we've seen to date, and has completely changed the way in which we seek to manage these issues. It is also very sad today that we learn that there have been 1,000 people who've fallen to COVID as a result of this pandemic over the last 18 months. Here we are, on 30 August 2021, where 1,000 people in this country have now fallen victim to that virus. We know that many fell around the world, and indeed they hit that mark in the United Kingdom back in March of last year. It was the same in the United States, the same in France, in April in Canada and in September in Israel. This pandemic has imposed a heavy toll on the entire world. Our efforts are focused on combating it as best as we possibly can. We know that more than 30,000 lives have been saved in this country because of the combined efforts of our government together with the governments at a state and territory level and, most importantly, the great work of Australians around the country doing what they need to do each and every day. And on a day where we have seen those cases rise, where we have seen more than 1,000 cases a day becoming more regular, particularly out of New South Wales, we can also say that on the weekend 379,114 Australians went and got vaccinated. That is a great cause for hope. COVID-19: Morrison Government 48 14:08 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax My question goes to the Prime Minister: We are making daily progress on the national plan as more and more Australians, including those in my electorate, continue to arm themselves against COVID-19 through vaccination. Will the Prime Minister please update the House on how this plan will safely restore livelihoods and help to secure Australia's post-pandemic future? 14:09 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for Fairfax for his question. While I have this opportunity, can I commend the member for Fairfax for the tremendous work he did as my special envoy on the Brisbane 2032 Olympics and continues to do now, working with the Minister for Sport and the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport and Regional Development, as we prepare for those wonderful games into the future. While we're at it, congratulations to all our Paralympians over there in Tokyo who are doing themselves, their families and the whole country proud. Our national plan is about hope. Our national plan is about opening up, not locking down. Our plan is about a safe transition for those states that may have no COVID cases and those states that are locked down. It is about a safe transition for both of them, so we can move to the situation that's not too far away when we can live with this virus and not live in fear of it. It's about weddings, it's about parties—it's about everything. It's about all the things that go to the life in our country that we enjoy so much. It's about restoring lives. It's about restoring livelihoods. Our plan is about moving forward and it's about securing Australia's future in what will remain a very uncertain world on the other side of this pandemic. Lockdowns do need to end, and future lockdowns do need to be avoided. We know that because we know those lockdowns are taking a terrible toll on our country: on the mental health of our citizens and particularly of our young people; on the small businesses that have to struggle through each day, although, indeed, given economic support, at the same time, they would like to see their businesses able to stand on their own two feet; on our children and their education; on our families; and on the jobs of Australians. All of these lockdowns and our response are taking a heavy toll. We can also not remain locked out of a global economy that is opening up again. With trade, students, travellers, tourists, essential workers and others who are needed to drive our economy forward, our national plan is about reconnecting to that global economy that is opening up, which is necessary for every single part of this country to be able to move forward. Australians agree, because 58 per cent of them have had their first dose of a vaccine, with 34 per cent of them over the age of 16 having had two doses and more than 50 per cent of those over 50 having had both doses. Now we know that today those aged 16 to 29 join the groups that are being vaccinated and on 13 September 12- to 15-year-olds will also be able to join those who are getting vaccinated. We're committed to that plan of hope. We're committed to seeing Australia open up. We're committed to Australian lives and livelihoods being restored through the implementation of the national plan. COVID-19: Lockdowns 49 14:12 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister and it goes to the answer that he just gave. Is it a fact that no Australian wants to be a part of lockdowns, every Australian wants to return to life as normal, but the reason why we're in the current predicament is that this Prime Minister thought that it wasn't a race to get vaccines out the door, it wasn't a race to set up national quarantine? If the Prime Minister refuses to acknowledge his mistakes, how can Australians be confident that he won't repeat them? 14:12 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook It's all about how you finish the race, as I've said before in this place. What has been achieved in these many months now, despite the setbacks that we had early on in the vaccination program, which saw our expectation of being able to offer a vaccine to everybody in this country being set back some four months from what we originally anticipated, is that it has already been brought back to being able to vaccinate everybody before the end of the year. As each vaccination is demonstrating, we believe we'll be able to meet that even sooner, so the demonstration of the government's resolve has been put in place by ensuring that the vaccination rates that we are now achieving—the fact that we're able to bring forward doses, the fact that we've been able to achieve and realise additional supplies and we have more irons in the fire that will see further doses, we believe, being made available in this country—all of that demonstrates that the vaccination program's earlier challenges have been overcome. Those challenges have been overcome, whether it was the hesitancy around the AstraZeneca vaccine, which many shared, but this government didn't share, I can assure you. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my left! Mr MORRISON E3L As we stood up for the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, others sought to cast aspersions on it—but not our government. We continued on and saw millions upon millions of Australians continue to receive those AstraZeneca vaccines, which remain a crucial component of the program even now. Even now, that AstraZeneca vaccine, of course, is so important, and it's manufactured—Australian made—right here in our country, in Melbourne, and I want to thank all those workers down at CSL. I have had the opportunity to meet them on many occasions and thank them for the great work that they have done of ensuring that our country could be vaccinated. Over 10 million, or thereabouts, AstraZeneca vaccines have been achieved, and they were achieved because our government took the decision last August, a year ago, to ensure that we could make them here in Australia, and there are millions upon millions of lives that have been saved as a result of that decision. COVID-19: Economic Recovery 49 14:15 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls [by video link] My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Will the Deputy Prime Minister inform the House how sticking to the Morrison-Joyce government's national plan will ensure access to a secure regional workforce both now and as we continue a safe pathway out of the COVID-19 pandemic? Is the Deputy Prime Minister aware of any alternative policies? 14:15 Mr JOYCE E5D New England I thank the member for Nicholls for his question. I might briefly also acknowledge the passing of Senator Alex Gallacher, whom I worked with. Alex and Senator Sterle were best of mates. I know Sterlo will be taking this pretty tough as well. To Paola: I wish you all the best. I'll have more to say on Alex at a later stage. I thank the member for Nicholls for his question and note what he and his people are currently dealing with in Shepparton. I note that it is a hotspot and that he has been in close contact with us all the way through, making absolutely certain that his messages get through to me and that his requests get through to the Treasurer. He is a champion for his people. He's always at the forefront, parochial and hardworking, and I thank him for that. He also knows, with SPC and the horticultural and farming industries in his electorate, how vitally important it is that we continue on this program of suppression of the virus as we drive towards making sure we hit our targets so that we can give back to the Australian people the liberties and freedoms that they were born with and that they expect to get back. We know this is vitally important, because there is a connection from the paddock to your dinner plate. If we can't make sure that we get through this as quickly as possible—and we are—then you don't have the farm workers to pick the produce, you don't have the processors to process the produce and you don't have the transport workers from the union that Senator Gallacher was from, the Transport Workers Union, to get them to the supermarkets; therefore, you don't have dinner on your plate. All these things are connected, and the people in regional Australia are fundamentally connected to the people of every suburb of Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane. But we are driving forward with this process. In greater Shepparton, 57 per cent of people have received at least one inoculation. We are driving forward with this process: last week, two million people were inoculated. We're driving forward with this process: 57 per cent of Australians now have had at least their first shot. We are making sure that we continue on with this task. It is disappointing that I get a sense that some on the opposite side aren't hoping for the future but are hoping for failure, because we are making absolutely certain— Mr Giles interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The Deputy Prime Minister will resume his seat. The member for Scullin will cease interjecting. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order. Mr Burke DYW It is on reflections on members. Given the time we're in, that's about as serious a reflection as he can make. We're talking about the lives of Australians. The SPEAKER 00APG The Deputy Prime Minister will be careful with his language. I don't want to detain the House. The Deputy Prime Minister has the call. Mr JOYCE E5D I would have to say that I did listen to the shadow minister for health on the weekend on Insiders and I did not get any idea as to what the Labor Party plan is—not one. When once more put in a corner by the compere, Mr Speers, who said, 'What exactly is your plan? What exactly do you agree with?'— Mr Stephen Jones interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Member for Whitlam! Mr JOYCE E5D there was no definitive answer. That is the issue. We have a plan, a safe plan, to get us to where our nation can open up. Labor? Nothing. (Time expired) COVID-19 50 14:19 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh [by video link] My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister and the Minister for Health and Aged Care have both said that having no COVID patients in intensive care is a measure of the government's success. How many COVID patients in how many states are in intensive care today? 14:19 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook The information that I have available to me on those figures currently is that, in hospital, there are 925 people; in ICU, there are 155; and those who are on ventilators, 63. What I also know is, this year, in the middle of this wave of the pandemic in New South Wales, over the course of these many months, some 92 people have passed away in New South Wales over the course of 2021. What we know is that, when the second wave went through Victoria this same time last year, 820 people passed away over the course of 2020 in Victoria. The overwhelming majority of those who passed away in Victoria last year were in residential aged care. And what we have been able to achieve this year, prior to these most recent waves hitting New South Wales, Victoria and the ACT, is that we have double-dose vaccination rates in our aged-care facilities upwards of 80 per cent. And what that has meant is that our most vulnerable in our community this year, because of the vaccines, compared to last year, and in particular the priority we placed on vaccinating those in residential aged-care facilities and ensuring that we were able to visit all of those facilities to ensure that those double-dose vaccinations were provided—that has saved hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of lives. I want to thank the in-reach teams, I want to thank all of those who were part of them—the clinical staff, those who prepared and planned them, Professor Murphy, General Frewen, and others—who ensured that, by putting in place those arrangements, so many lives have been spared this year as a result of the second and third waves that we've seen come through our cities. In addition to that, I appreciate the work that Professor Murphy has been doing. It has been ongoing work for many, many months to ensure that he has been working with the heads of the health departments of all the states and territories to ensure that our state health systems and hospital systems are in a position of resilience to deal with further demands placed on their system. And we know, from the information that has been presented, that in ICUs we can anticipate around about up to 20 per cent, in New South Wales, of their capacity being used up because of COVID and, for the rest of the country, that's around 10 per cent over the next week or so. So we're working closely with the states and territories to ensure that the resilience is in place there in those state health systems. Further work was tasked again on Friday, and I'm expecting that back over the course of this week. I want to thank Professor Murphy and all the secretaries, all the health departments around our country, to make sure our hospital system is resilient to deal with the health challenges that are ahead. (Time expired) Political Parties: Advertising 51 14:22 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah [by video link] To the Prime Minister: over the weekend, we saw thousands of text messages and emails sent to constituents of many electorates by the United Australia Party, spreading misinformation about vaccines and lockdowns. The past two federal elections have been influenced by misinformation and deceptive political advertising from each of the major parties. Do you support politicians and third parties having the ability to lie in political advertising? And, if you don't, will you do something about it? 14:23 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook We are very serious about combating misinformation. There is a COVID-19 misinformation portal, called 'COVID-19 Mythbusting', which I refer to the member, on the australia.gov.au website that corrects myths and misinformation about COVID-19. The Department of Home Affairs reviews and refers online misinformation about COVID-19 to social media platforms to request that it is taken down. The Department of Health have a feature on their website called 'Is it true?' to help answer questions people may have about COVID-19 vaccines and respond to vaccine misinformation they may have heard. This is important information for people in our community today to ensure that they can be protected from the threat of misinformation. The Department of Home Affairs works closely, in particular, with the Department of Health to provide multicultural communities with accurate information on COVID-19. Home Affairs counters the threat of COVID-19 misinformation and disinformation by ensuring accurate and authoritative information is accessible and in language. Home Affairs' community liaison officer network supports CALD communities by relaying community concerns to government and disseminating that information. Settlement service providers also assist in conveying in-language messaging to humanitarian entrants and their communities. The COVID-19 in-language website provides accurate, official government information translated into 63 languages, including fact sheets on COVID-19 misinformation and disinformation and on the vaccine rollout. Indeed, I've participated in quite a number of those Zoom forums with multicultural leaders, across New South Wales in particular, to deal with those very issues. So I would refer the member to those very important resources and encourage her to share those resources with members of her community. COVID-19: Small Business 51 14:25 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid My question is to the Treasurer. Will the Treasurer remind the House of the Morrison government's strong and enduring support for small businesses around Australia, including in my electorate of Reid, as we move towards implementing the national plan, and is the Treasurer aware of any threats to small business as they struggle through the effects of the pandemic? 14:25 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Reid for her question and acknowledge her strong support for small business across her community. I had the privilege to join with her to visit Schibello Coffee in her electorate, who were accessing the immediate expensing provisions which are helping them invest and grow their own business. The Morrison government, from day one of this pandemic, has been seeking to support small- and medium-sized businesses. The cash flow boost—we've passed legislated and legislative tax cuts for small and medium-sized businesses. We put in place an expanded immediate expensing provision, the loss carry back measure, as well as concessional loans, and this has helped contribute to a fall in the unemployment rate to 4.6 per cent, a 12-year low. But now we have a desperate Labor Party that is seeking to destroy a fundamental pillar of our tax system, namely, the protection of private taxpayers' confidential information—private taxpayers' confidential information! Now, the Labor Party is seeking to force the tax commissioner to dump in the Senate— Mr Stephen Jones interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Whitlam will cease interjecting. Mr FRYDENBERG FKL the details of more than 10,000 businesses. This is what the tax commissioner has said about Labor's proposal: It will 'harm the public interest by undermining public confidence in his ability to keep taxation information confidential.' This is what the Australian Hotels Association has said of Labor's proposal: 'It's a dangerous political stunt.' Here is what the Australian Industry Group has said of Labor's proposal: 'It's misguided and a dangerous precedent that must be rejected.' Here is what the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has said about Labor's proposal: 'It's a deliberate attempt to smear.' This is what the council of small business has said about Labor's proposal: 'It's been pursued for political gain.' At the last election, Australians knew that the Labor Party came after retirees and homeowners. Well, this election, they're coming after small business. This election, they're coming after small business, and, if the Labor Party is prepared to stoop this low to force the tax commissioner to reveal private taxpayers' confidential information, whose information will they seek to have provided next to the parliament? These businesses were complying with the law. These businesses were receiving government support in the middle of a once-in-a-century pandemic. And, for that, the Labor Party is coming after them. COVID-19: New South Wales 52 14:28 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur My question is to the Prime Minister. New South Wales Premier Gladys Berejiklian has said that she doesn't expect the number of patients in New South Wales intensive care units to peak until October. What extra resourcing is the Prime Minister providing to New South Wales hospitals so that intensive care units are not overwhelmed in the coming weeks and months? 14:29 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I thank the member, and respect his concerns. In particular, the first thing we have done is to provide a private hospitals guarantee. This creates a partnership between public and private hospitals. It means that the entire New South Wales private hospital system is available for the New South Wales government to draw upon, to assist with nursing staff, with other staff, with beds, with ICU capacity and with ventilation capacity. Across Australia, this represents over 57,000 nurses, it represents over 100,000 staff and it represents over 30,000 beds. This is a fundamental partnership, the likes of which I'm not aware of having been created in Australia previously. It has already been invoked and called upon within New South Wales, so the private hospitals viability guarantee is not just capable; it's in operation. In terms of our funding, we're currently investing over $7.8 billion this year in New South Wales and $41 billion over the current public hospitals agreement within New South Wales. That's expected to see significant increases of over a billion dollars—investments that have seen a very large impact in a positive way upon that system. In addition to that, we are also making available masks, gloves and gowns, and we are making available additional funding. And we have the capacity to provide additional ventilators through the National Medical Stockpile. However, I should say that New South Wales has done an extraordinary job in preparing its system. It has increased from a ventilator capacity in ICUs from 500 to 2,000. That's on the latest advice of the Premier, Gladys Berejiklian, in her press conference of 26 August 2021. We have assisted in acquiring that ventilator capacity not just in New South Wales but around Australia. That ventilator capacity has increased around Australia from approximately 2,000 to 7½ thousand. This is preparation for all of those circumstances. What we've seen and heard is that, for example, the esteemed Chief Health Officer of New South Wales, Dr Kerry Chant, said only in recent days: 'We've got the capacity to work with our private hospitals, in which we have significant bed capacity. Our hospitals will be doing a lot of local planning about which patients are best cared for in which circumstances.' So we have provided funds and we have provided ventilators, gloves and gowns. But, above all else, we have provided staff and a partnership with the private hospitals. COVID-19: Mental Health 52 14:32 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay [by video link] My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Will the minister please outline to the House the importance of Australia's national plan for COVID and how this plan will assist with the mental health of all Australians, including children? 14:33 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I thank the member for Lindsay. The very first event that I was involved with with her was in fact a focus on mental health for children and young people in her electorate, shortly after she came to office and joined this parliament. So her commitment is deep, real and fundamental. We know the challenges of this pandemic. We see them around the world and we see them in Australia. We see them in any place where there are lockdowns. We know that, with over half a million cases a day on average—and it's heading well north of that—and with over 9,000 lives lost a day on average at the moment, its impact is ravaging countries around the world in the midst of a pandemic, the likes of which we haven't seen for a hundred years. On that front, the first thing is the national plan and hope. As with any mental health challenge, it's for people to know that there is a pathway through. To know that there is a future and to know, to quote the Doherty institute, that there is 'light at the end of the tunnel' is fundamentally important. On that front, there is light at the end of the tunnel. The fact is that we've seen, as the Prime Minister said, 379,000 vaccinations over the weekend and we're now at 19,085,000 vaccinations. Each day in the last week was a record for that respective day, and last week was higher than any week, on a per capita basis, for vaccinations delivered than in either the United Kingdom or the United States during the course of their rollouts. All of these things are coming together to give people real and fundamental hope. Very significantly, our general practices—through their own practices, through the Commonwealth vaccination clinics and through the Aboriginal medical services—have now delivered over 10 million vaccines. To add to what the Prime Minister said with regard to AstraZeneca, there have been over six million first doses for Australians. All of these things give hope and are fundamentally important. At the same time, in order to support mental health, we have invested very significantly. We have invested over half a million dollars directly in mental health support—in particular, support for Kids Helpline, headspace, Beyond Blue and Lifeline. But, almost inconceivably, during the current lockdown 340 Victorian youths are being admitted to hospital each week with mental health concerns. That tears all of us apart. The pathway through means that they have to have that light at the end of the tunnel. That's why the plan's so important. But it's also about getting kids back into playgrounds and getting kids back into schools. These things are fundamental for their education but, above all else, they are fundamental for their health and their mental health. JobKeeper Payment 53 14:36 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner My question is to the Treasurer. Why is the Morrison-Joyce government not asking businesses to repay the $13 billion in JobKeeper payments they pocketed while their revenue rose but sending threatening letters to Sydney and Melbourne families in lockdown demanding they pay back historic childcare subsidies? Why are the Treasurer's priorities so wrong? 14:36 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong The member for Fenner wants to make lawbreakers out of businesses that received JobKeeper. When businesses received JobKeeper, they did so in accordance with the law—namely, there was an anticipated decline in their turnover. The member for Fenner doesn't ask me about Labour Association Services or the $22 million that apparently went to unions and other associated entities. The reality is that JobKeeper was a remarkable program. They are not my words; they are the words of the governor of the Reserve Bank. Indeed, they say the program saved 700,000-plus jobs and it's been a key part of our economic recovery. Let me remind the honourable members opposite what the Australian economy was looking like when JobKeeper was announced. The unemployment rate, Treasury thought, could reach as high as 15 per cent; we could see up to two million Australians unemployed. We were literally standing at the edge of the economic abyss. We saw JobKeeper come in and, immediately, it stemmed the tide of job losses and we saw nine consecutive weeks of increases in consumer business confidence. We saw increases in confidence as a result of JobKeeper and we have seen the unemployment rate now get down to a 12-year low of 4.6 per cent—compared to when Labor was last in office, when the unemployment rate was 5.7 per cent. JobKeeper has been a key part of our economic recovery. According to Treasury, in the review they undertook, it was well targeted. In the month of April we saw an average decline of 37 per cent in JobKeeper businesses. And we know that small businesses right across the country have relied on JobKeeper to stay in business. Those opposite are seeking to attack those small businesses that received JobKeeper; those opposite are now seeking to have their important, confidential, private taxpayer details revealed publicly. And we know what the industry groups have said about that. I repeat to the House that the Australian Hotels Association said Labor's tactic is a dangerous political stunt. The Australian Industry Group said Labor's tactic is misguided and a dangerous precedent. The Australian Chamber of Commerce has called Labor's tactic a desperate attempt to smear. And COSBOA has said of Labor's tactic that it is pursued for pure political gain. You cannot trust the Labor Party. Small business— (Time expired) Global Security 53 14:39 Mr GOODENOUGH 74046 Moore My question is to the Minister for Defence. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is keeping Australians safe and secure through regional partnerships and alliances? 14:40 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I want to thank the honourable member for his question and thank him for his support of the Australian Defence Force. Mr Speaker, on indulgence, I just want to make the House aware that there are media reports—I haven't received confirmation as yet—that tragically two soldiers have died in a vehicle rollover near Townsville. I'm waiting for further details on that, but, of course, we have significant personnel and assets around Lavarack Barracks in the north of our country. There are movements on the road every day, and it is a very dangerous task that our troops are involved in, even during training exercises and the movement of equipment up and down our national highways. That's very sad news for our country to learn, and our condolences and thoughts are with their friends and their family. We'll have more to say on that during the day. What we've seen in Afghanistan over the course of the last couple of weeks is that our relationship with the United States and the United Kingdom, in particular, is absolutely invaluable. We wouldn't have had the intelligence in relation to the terrorist attack without our relationship with the United States within the Five Eyes compact that we have. We wouldn't have received that information which ultimately contributed to us making a decision for our troops not to be at Abbey gate, and we are very grateful for that support. We wouldn't have been able, without the 1,000 British troops who were at Hamid Karzai airport, providing the security there along with the 4,000 American troops, to lift any of the 4,100 people that we have brought back to our country or those who are on their way back to our country now. The relationship with those two countries is absolutely crucial to the future security of our country, but it doesn't stop there. Our relationships with India and with Japan in the Quad, with Vietnam, with Indonesia, with South Korea and with many other countries in the region are absolutely essential, and more so than ever. We know that we have a deteriorating security situation in the Indo-Pacific, and it's why we have countries like Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom and others—France included—who are focusing their attention on the Indo-Pacific. We know that NATO has taken a particular interest in what is taking place in the Indo-Pacific. We are concerned about the militarisation of areas in the South China Sea. We are worried about coercion and we are worried about activities otherwise that would seek to undermine the sovereignty of our near and dear neighbours. Our country will always stand up for not only our own values but the values that are represented in our Five Eyes relationship. Those values and that sovereignty of our neighbours is absolutely paramount to us also. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition, on indulgence? 14:43 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Yes. I join with the defence minister in expressing my condolences to the family and friends of the two soldiers who've been killed in the rollover of an Army vehicle near Townsville. This is a tragic loss for people wearing our uniform, serving our nation and defending our people. My thoughts and condolences are with their families and friends. Workplace Relations 54 14:43 Mr BURKE DYW Watson My question is to the Prime Minister. According to ABC reports last night, delivery drivers on the Amazon Flex platform don't get workers compensation or superannuation. They can effectively be sacked with no reason given. How will the Prime Minister prevent Australia's future being dominated by low-paid and insecure work like this? 14:44 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I thank the member for his question, and I will undertake to review the matter that he's raised here today and seek that information from the Minister for Industrial Relations. What I do know is that our government has legislated to support the uncertainty of work of casuals in this country. That was the package of reforms that we brought through this parliament. They were the package of reforms that we worked through with those both in the business community and in the trade union movement. That was the initiative which I commenced in the middle of last year when I set out very clearly that there were many challenges that the country had to face going forward to be successful in a post-COVID world and to ensure that there were both the certainty and flexibility necessary for the Australian economy to perform and for people who are in uncertain work to get that certainty. That's why we introduced that legislation and that's why we supported it. I note the point that has been made by the member in raising that question. But I also note the important action that our government took to create certainty for those in casual work in this country by the legislation we introduced and we ensured went through this chamber and the other place. National Security 54 14:45 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is ensuring our intelligence and law enforcement agencies have the resources they need to counter the threat of terrorism and keep all Australians safe? 14:45 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I thank the member for her question and acknowledge the great leadership that she shows every day in her electorate of Moncrieff. Our government has always maintained that the virus is not the only challenge to our safety and our security in a very rapidly changing world. Unfortunately, the events that we've seen unfold in Afghanistan, including the evil, calculated terrorist attack, are a reminder that terrorism remains a very real and evolving threat to our communities, to our safety and to our way of life here in Australia. This is a problem that we simply cannot be complacent about, and this government is certainly not complacent about our national security. In September 2014 the national terrorism threat was raised to probable, and it remains at that level. Since that time there have been 139 people who have been charged as a result of 67 counterterrorism operations around Australia, and there are currently 34 people before the courts for terrorism related offences. This is not a threat that has gone away—in fact, it's quite the opposite. Our government is working very closely with our international partners, particularly our Five Eyes partners, because we are very much aware of the threat that terrorism poses to our nation. Law enforcement and national security continue to be particularly important to us, and we continue to pursue a range of options. Firstly, we do so with legislation, and there was some legislation that passed the House last week. I thank the opposition for supporting that legislation and its passage through the House and through the Senate. We also have legislation before the parliament that deals with the management of high-risk terrorist offenders. This is something, as I've said, that the government take particularly seriously, and this has been demonstrated by the $1.3 billion that we have provided to ASIO, our leading agency in national security and intelligence matters. They are now well equipped, from a resource point of view, with $1.3 billion to make sure that they continue the work they do, particularly looking at intelligence threats and terrorism issues, and they will continue to do that. I think it's fair to say that this government certainly understands national security. We understand the risk that is posed by terrorist organisations to the Australian way of life, and we will continue to do everything that we possibly can to counter those terrible, terrible events. Workplace Relations 55 14:48 Mr BURKE DYW Watson My question is again to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister adopt Labor's plan to provide the Fair Work Commission with the necessary powers to act on insecure work so that Australian workers can be better protected from exploitation and dangerous working conditions? Shouldn't every Australian worker be paid at least the minimum wage, and are there any circumstances where the government supports workers being paid below the minimum wage? 14:49 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I thank the shadow minister for his question. Our government remains committed to the arrangements in the Fair Work Act. That includes matters to deal with the gig economy and, of course, secure work. Labor announced its very-light-on-detail Secure Australian Jobs Plan in February 2021. The existing objective of the Fair Work Act is to provide a balanced framework for cooperative relations between employers and employees and the delivery of a framework that is fair to working Australians while being flexible for businesses. This framework is designed to carefully balance the needs of employers and employees. The fact is that Australians value the diversity that the labour market and its various features offers. We are committed to the arrangements which exist under the Fair Work Act. Women's Economic Security 55 14:50 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm My question is to the Minister for the Environment, representing the Minister for Women. The Morrison government's National Summit on Women's Safety will take place next week. Will the minister please outline to the House the action the government is taking to support women's economic security, including through the COVID-19 pandemic, and what the national plan will mean for women's economic security as we go forward? 14:51 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I thank the member for Chisholm for her question and commend her on her leadership across so many women's issues in her electorate. It is heartening to see there are more women in work now than before the pandemic began. That's a positive trend that I know all members on all sides of the chamber will acknowledge. The government is determined to build on this strong progress and see women's workforce participation continue to grow, especially as we hit our vaccination targets and reopen the economy. The certainty and confidence you have around your job prospects, your work, your employment and your income go to the heart of your economic security. And women's economic security and financial independence are critical components of women's safety. That's why they're going to feature prominently as a topic of conversation at the National Summit on Women's Safety next week, being co-chaired by the Minister for Women and the Minister for Women's Safety in the other place. Both are doing an outstanding job with this summit. The Women's Budget Statement this year included $1.9 billion in initiatives to strengthen women's workforce participation and their economic security. That investment is now more important than ever not just for women's safety but also to benefit our whole economy. With lockdowns in Victoria, here in the ACT and in my home state of New South Wales, of course these lockdowns affect the economy. But they can sometimes disproportionately affect women in the economy. It is an incredibly difficult time for women, coping with so many challenges on the home front as well as often on the work front—managing home schooling, managing toddlers at home, dealing with the mental wellness of their family and worrying about their finances, and often, it does seem, putting themselves last. It is so important now that we support women not only through the direct payments we are making to make up for lost work hours but also through providing additional targeted support for childcare centres, particularly in areas under lockdown. We want child care and early learning to be there for women, families and children on the other side of this. Importantly the government is providing families with additional absence days and allowing gap fee waivers to keep children enrolled. It means services have still been able to receive the childcare subsidy even if children haven't attended, to keep those services strong. We can't lockdown forever. Lockdowns are causing real harm, particularly to women's economic security. The national plan is our way out, and it is what's needed. It's needed for our economy, our mental health and our national recovery, not just for women but indeed for all Australians. Prime Minister 56 14:54 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam Question to the Prime Minister: the Prime Minister said that he supports the premiers in the work they do to save this country, to save lives and to save livelihoods. Why, then, did the Prime Minister support Clive Palmer's High Court case to tear down Western Australia's borders, and why is it reported that the New South Wales Premier regards him as an 'evil bully'? The SPEAKER 00APG I'm not going to call the Prime Minister immediately. The last part of the question is out of order, but the part of the question relating to the High Court challenge is in order. The Prime Minister has the call. 14:55 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook Rather than do it later in the day, I can confirm that erroneous report. The New South Wales Premier has made it very clear to me in her message that she has never used such words, ever. The SPEAKER 00APG I just said that part of the question was out of order. Mr MORRISON E3L I won't address the smears of those opposite. What I will do is address the more substantive matter, and I seek your indulgence on restating that part of the question. The SPEAKER 00APG I won't restate the question. If you could just restate the question without the bit that I've ruled out of order, otherwise we'll just move on. Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B The question to the Prime Minister is: why, then, did the Prime Minister support Clive Palmer's High Court case to tear down the Western Australian borders? Mr MORRISON E3L The member must be misinformed, because the Commonwealth did not pursue that case, and it is erroneous to suggest that that is what the government did. The government did not pursue that case at all. We did not pursue that case. The Labor Party continues to push this falsehood around the country, as they have a habit of doing. The each-way position of the Labor Party, across the pandemic, is there for all to see. They support the plan; they don't support the plan. They do support the plan; they don't support the plan. They support JobKeeper; they're opposed to JobKeeper. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order? Mr Albanese R36 On relevance. The question was very direct. A very short question is now before the chair about— The SPEAKER 00APG It was very direct in the end. It wasn't direct at the beginning. Mr ALBANESE R36 Correct. It is about the government's support for Clive Palmer's WA High Court challenge that cost taxpayers a million dollars. The SPEAKER 00APG The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. I'll just say to the Leader of the Opposition: he's got into the habit of using a point of order to not only ask the question again but now even ask additional questions. So if he wants to ask an additional question he can do that. That's what question time is for. The Prime Minister has the call, and he does need to be relevant to the question, but I'm not discounting the fact that the original question did have some political commentary and, at the heart of it, an accusation. The Prime Minister has the call. Mr MORRISON E3L I'll restate what I said at the commencement of my answer: what the Labor Party is putting about is not true. We did not pursue that case. That is not what occurred. For the opposition, for the Labor Party, to peddle untruth is something I've become used to with this Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party. Exports 57 14:58 Mr ZIMMERMAN 203092 North Sydney [by video link] My question is to the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment. Implementation of the national plan will create more opportunities for Australian exporters. Will the minister please update the house on how the Morrison government is supporting our exporters and how this assistance will create more Australian jobs as we prepare to open up under the national plan? 14:58 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon Can I thank the member for North Sydney for his question. I know he understands how important the national plan is to our tourism industry, something he's very passionate about. But it is also important for our exporters. One in five Australians are dependent on export related businesses, and in regional Australia it's one in four. We continue to provide support for our exporters as we seek to implement our national plan. On Friday the government announced that it was extending IFAM and providing another $260.9 million for the IFAM program. We have now provided nearly $1 billion for IFAM to support Australian jobs in our export industries. This has led to some remarkable results which have benefited every state and the Northern Territory: abalone from South Australia to Hong Kong; mangoes from the Northern Territory to South Korea and Canada; tuna from New South Wales to Japan and the US; strawberries from Western Australia to Malaysia and Singapore; Victorian lamb to the Middle East; live coral trout from Far North Queensland to Hong Kong; and Tasmanian salmon to China. But we cannot continue to support and benefit these exporters forever. That's why the national plan is so important. We cannot continue to provide support to those exporters from all those states forever. Eventually we have to open up our economy safely so those exporters can get on and do the things that they love to do: go over and visit those overseas markets and build the partnerships they need with the importers in those countries. When it comes to investing—whether it be investing in other countries to grow their businesses or seeking investment in Australia so that they can grow their businesses—that requires them to be able to travel overseas and it requires people to be able to come to Australia. That's what our national plan sets out; it sets out how we can do that safely. That's why we need all states and territories signing up to our national plan. We can't have our wheat exporters, our iron ore exporters and those who are pursuing new opportunities in new energy, when it comes to hydrogen, here in Australia and not able to go out and seek those markets; they have to be able to travel. That's why our national plan is so important. That's why we're backing the national plan and it's why we need all states and territories to do exactly the same. COVID-19: COVIDSafe App 57 15:01 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Last week, the Minister for Health and Aged Care said that the government's COVIDSafe app had played an important role in contact tracing. But, according to the Canberra Times, a report was handed to the minister in March this year which said that the app had provided little assistance to the health response between March and November 2020, and increased the workload of contact tracers for little reward. Is that true? 15:02 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders The COVIDSafe app has 7.6 million Australians registered to use it. From the 779 COVID-positive users that have had uploads, the app recorded 1.65 million digital handshakes and 2,827 potential close contacts. In particular, we know that in the case of New South Wales and in the example of the outbreak at the Mounties we had clear identification of cases which had otherwise not been notified. They were positive cases and it allowed for tracking and tracing, which allowed for the specific outcomes. It meant that that outbreak was able to be contained. So what we see is that this is one tool that is available to states and territories. We continue to encourage all of them to use it. We believe, as we've seen in the United Kingdom, for example, that it has significant potential here. But, most importantly, those examples show its capacity and its impact. Energy 57 15:03 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker My question is to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. Will the minister please update the House on how securing affordable, reliable energy for families and businesses in my electorate of Barker will secure our future post the COVID-19 pandemic? 15:04 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I thank the member for Barker for his question and for his steadfast commitment to affordable, reliable energy for businesses across his electorate. Those are businesses like the Naracoorte Hotel-Motel, which I hope to visit again in the not-too-distant future—businesses that need affordable and reliable energy to secure their future post the pandemic. Of course, the member knows that our plan is working. Our default market offer has delivered businesses in electorates like his and right across South Australia up to $2,800 in reduction in prices for electricity. Under the default market offer in South Australia, households have $700 a year in savings. Under this government, we've seen the lowest wholesale prices in nine years. We've secured the fuel South Australians need to keep things moving. We're securing investment and facilitating investment in transmission like the PEC project. But we also need to make sure our electricity grid is fit for the future. Last year alone, we saw seven gigawatts of renewable capacity invested. That's the equivalent of four large coal-fired power stations in one year. And with that, whilst there's very significant reduction in emissions, there are also challenges. We need to balance investment in dispatchable capacity. That's why we're driving reforms in the National Electricity Market. We're making sure there are essential systems and services in place, the right investment in transmission infrastructure and, of course, incentives to invest in dispatchable capacity. There's strong support for these reforms. Matt Howell, CEO of Tomago Aluminium, the largest user of energy in Australia, has welcomed the reforms and said: It's that reliability key—it matters for everybody. But it matters even more for aluminium smelters. The AWU secretary, Dan Walton, has welcomed the changes, saying they were needed to avoid catastrophic outcomes for Australian manufacturers. The CFMEU national president, Tony Maher, echoed those sentiments, saying, 'You cannot have a Hazelwood situation repeated across the country.' As the Energy Security Board chair, Kerry Schott, has said, these reforms will stop price spikes. She has dubbed opponents to the changes 'crazy'. These reforms are an essential part of securing the energy market now and into the future. And on this side of the House we all, like the member for Barker, are absolutely committed to the affordable, reliable energy Australians need as we come out of the pandemic. Prime Minister 58 15:07 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister, and it goes to his answer just previously, where he suggested the federal government had nothing to do with Clive Palmer's court case against the WA government just last year. Isn't that not true? Isn't it a fact that the federal government incurred costs of $770,000 for the Government Solicitor, $66,000 for experts and $41,000 to Clive Palmer as a result of the intervention in the case? Why does this Prime Minister never accept responsibility? 15:07 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I said that the government didn't pursue the case, and that is exactly the truth of the matter. The fact that the Leader of the Opposition would seek to misrepresent that in this House is a reflection on him, not the government. The government chose not to pursue that case. I discussed the matter with the Premier, and the government chose not to pursue it. Mr Albanese interjecting— Mr MORRISON E3L The Leader of the Opposition interjects about the use of taxpayers' money. Well, given that now over 50 per cent of the population have received a first dose, under the Leader of the Opposition's plan, he would have shelled out $3 billion for nothing. The SPEAKER 00APG I would say to the Prime Minister he is answering now a question he wasn't asked. Veterans 58 15:08 Ms FLINT 245550 Boothby My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister for Defence Personnel. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is supporting and assisting our veterans and their families, particularly at this very challenging time? 15:08 Mr GEE 261393 Calare I thank the member for Boothby for her question. Before I continue, I just want to say that the reports out of Townsville this afternoon are extraordinarily tragic. Townsville is a very tight-knit community. I know that I extend the condolences of everyone in this place not only to the family and the friends but also to the colleagues of those who lost their lives this afternoon. I thank the member for Boothby for her question. I note the member for Boothby has a very proud military history in her family history. I know her great-grandfather served on the Western Front in the First World War, at Pozieres and Bullecourt; was wounded; and was taken prisoner of war for 18 months before returning to Australia, where he settled at Lower Mitcham. I thank her family for that service and also for the member's enduring interest in veterans affairs. The events last week in Kabul were a murderous atrocity. If anyone were ever in any doubt about the righteousness of the Australian mission in Afghanistan, this was a brutal reminder of the criminals and terrorists that we were fighting and the threats that they posed to the security of our nation and the security of the world. Our country is extraordinarily proud of the men and women of the ADF but also our veterans who served in Afghanistan. Not only did they make Australia and the world a safer place but they helped to make Afghanistan a better place. They built bridges and schools and ran clinics. Since 2002, school enrolments have increased tenfold in Afghanistan. They gave girls education and women the opportunity to work. Access to basic health care increased from nine per cent to 57 per cent when the international community was in Afghanistan. These are the stories that our veterans want told. They served in the finest traditions of the Australian Defence Force, and we owe them a great debt of gratitude. Last week, I spoke of the support available to our veterans from Open Arms, Safe Zone Support, which is the 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week counselling service that's available to those who want to call anonymously. And I'm about to announce the 112 organisations that will share in the $2.39 million of funding under the Veteran and Community Grants Program, which also supports veteran health and wellbeing. Hopefully, I'll be telling the House more about that soon. But there is something that everyone in the community can do this week to support the families of those who've served and sacrificed so much for our nation. As many of you would know, it is Legacy Week. I urge everyone to go to legacy.com to buy a badge, buy other Legacy products or even just make a donation to help Legacy help the families of those who've given so much to our country. 15:12 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler On indulgence—can I join with the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, and, I'm sure, every member of this House, in encouraging all of our constituents out there to give support to Legacy. They do amazing work for the families of our veterans, and they are a very worthy charity. Mr Morrison E3L I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS 59 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS COVID-19: Lockdowns 59 15:12 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook To add to an earlier answer, I referred to the number of AstraZeneca doses that have been administered in Australia. I said I believed it to be around about 10 million. I confirm it's 9.6 million. We expect that 10 million mark to be hit not too far from now. And 4.7 million of those doses have actually been administered since 1 July of this year, which I think is an extraordinary achievement of the national vaccination program—that so many AstraZeneca doses have been able to be administered since July. There were many challenges earlier. I remember standing up at the end of June, encouraging Australians to consider taking that AstraZeneca vaccine, and, since then, 4.7 million doses have been administered. Thank you, Australia. PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 59 PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS 15:13 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the Leader of the Opposition claim to have been misrepresented? Mr ALBANESE R36 I do, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 00APG You may proceed. Mr ALBANESE R36 During question time, the Prime Minister suggested that I was speaking an untruth in suggesting the Commonwealth had joined with Clive Palmer in the legal case against the WA government. I seek leave to table the document from the High Court of Australia, which includes a notice of intervention. The Attorney-General intervenes in support of the position of the plaintiffs, where the federal government joined with Clive Palmer and Mineralogy Pty Ltd as the first and second plaintiffs against the state of Western Australia and Christopher John Dawson as the second defendant to try to overturn decisions that the WA government had made. Leave not granted . STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER 59 STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER COVID-19: Parliament House 59 15:14 The SPEAKER 00APG While I've got everyone here, I just want to correct a media error that occurred on the Insiders: Talking Pictures program, where there was commentary to the effect that these perspex screens that are here were finally here after 18 months and there was a slight on the department. Can I just point out what I thought was fairly obvious: they're here because of the outbreak in the ACT. That's why they're here. There are a lot of people doing a lot of hard work, and I just wanted to correct that. I'm not going to correct every accuracy that occurs, because, as you all know, we'd need to extend the sittings probably for an extra week. DOCUMENTS 60 DOCUMENTS Presentation 60 15:14 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson Where would you start, Mr Speaker! Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. COMMITTEES 60 COMMITTEES Public Works Committee 60 Report 60 15:15 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's report, Report 7/2021: Referral made June 2021. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr ZAPPIA HWB by leave—On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, and also on behalf of the chair of the committee, the member for O'Connor, I present the committee's seventh report for 2021. Report No. 7 of 2021 considers one proposal referred to the committee in June 2021. The proposal is the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation's construction of a national collections building, with approval sought from the committee to develop new facilities at the Black Mountain Science and Innovation Park in Canberra. The estimated cost of this project is $70 million excluding GST. The project aims to consolidate all Canberra based national collections in one location through the development of a new national collections building and refurbishment of some existing buildings. The establishment of a national collections building will ensure Australia remains a global leader in biological research and innovation. The project will deliver state-of-the-art biodiversity research facilities and will guarantee the preservation, access and use of over 13 million specimens from Australia's national insect, wildlife and plant collections. I thank the CSIRO for their highly detailed presentation and briefing. Although the committee was unable to travel to the Black Mountain site to inspect the proposed works, CSIRO provided sufficient detail in their presentation and briefing to ensure the committee was able to appreciate the importance and the nature of the work. I also thank my committee members and the secretariat for assisting with the process. The committee recommends that the House find it expedient that the construction of a national collections building for CSIRO proceed. I commend the report to the House. BILLS 60 BILLS Customs Tariff Amendment (Incorporation of Proposals) Bill 2021 60

Customs Tariff Amendment (Incorporation of Proposals) Bill 2021

Returned from Senate 60 Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021 60

Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021

Second Reading 60 15:18 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest Proposed amendments to clause 6OP ensure that these types of accounts will be subject to the same protections. The records will be held securely by the custodian, the Secretary of the Attorney-General's Department, when the inquiry ends. A court will not be able to compel the department to disclose this information and third parties will not be able to seek this information under the freedom of information regime. Confidential information will only be able to be used in the report of the disability royal commission if it is de-identified or if the information is also given in evidence. Flexible non-publication direction procedures Subject to the passage of this bill, additional amendments will streamline existing arrangements in the act to enable certain members of a royal commission to more efficiently make directions for the non-publication of information and identities. Non-publication directions ensure that any evidence, documents or descriptions of anything produced that might enable a person to be identified shall not be published or shall not be published except in such a manner, and to such persons, as the commission specifies. Non-publication directions are an essential feature for protecting the identity of individuals, and other sensitive information such as locations or institutions, when giving evidence or providing information to a royal commission such as through a notice process. The chair of the disability royal commission wrote to the Prime Minister and requested an amendment to the act that would overcome practical difficulties for commissioners of a royal commission when making a non-publication direction. Practical difficulties can arise particularly when an urgent direction is required, as commissioners may fulfil their duties at different locations within Australia. During the COVID-19 pandemic, commissioners have been required to undertake official duties remotely in different locations, which has heightened the need for simplified processes. At an authorised member hearing, a direction may be made by either the chair alone, provided the chair is present at the hearing, or all members of that hearing. In circumstances other than an authorised member hearing the chair may give the direction, or a majority of the members of the commission may give the direction. This resolves the practical issue whereby a majority of commissioners have been required to collectively make a direction when a hearing is not occurring. This bill will provide greater flexibility for the disability royal commission, and commissioners of future royal commissions, to make non-publication directions. Efficient information sharing The bill would also act on a request by the chair of the disability royal commission to improve arrangements for Commonwealth royal commissions to communicate information and evidence obtained during the course of its inquiry with a royal commission, and a commission of inquiry, of a state or territory. This is an important and essential mechanism for this inquiry which has been set up as a joint Commonwealth and state royal commission, established through the issue of concurrent letters patent under the respective royal commissions legislation. Streamlining these information-sharing arrangements will create important efficiencies for the disability royal commission, and future royal commissions. Currently, most evidence tendered in the Commonwealth royal commission must be tendered for the concurrent state royal commissions. This is impractical and time consuming. The amendments will streamline the process of tendering documents by enabling evidence tendered on behalf of the Commonwealth disability royal commission to be easily shared with all concurrent state royal commissions. Improved processes for receiving and handling evidence will assist the commission to efficiently prepare a single and comprehensive final report drawing on all the evidence before Commonwealth and state commissions established under each jurisdictions respective legislation. This amendment would also remove onerous administrative requirements for the tendering of large volumes of evidence in each jurisdiction, in particular where it has been obtained under a compulsion pursuant to different state royal commission laws. Concluding remarks The government has given careful consideration to the development of this bill to ensure that it provides comprehensive protections to sensitive information. The drafting of our bill takes into account the specific circumstances in which people have given information to the royal commission. Royal commissions determine their own operating procedures, which includes the way that they invite people to make submissions and engage with it. It is important that the government has a proper understanding of these procedures so that the legislation can be drafted in a way that captures the information the chair of the royal commission has identified as needing protection. This is why the disability royal commission has been consulted closely on the development of the bill. The outcomes of the disability royal commission will be guided by people's lived experiences, and its outcomes must be based on a true reflection of those experiences. In order for the royal commission to fully realise the scope of its inquiry, it's important that the Australian community feels comfortable and supported in fully engaging with the royal commission. It is critical that people sharing their lived experiences with the royal commission feel respected and that survivors of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation have their experiences appropriately acknowledged, recognised and validated. 13:25 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I rise to speak in support of the Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021 and to make it clear that Labor supports the amendments contained in this bill, which do serve a critically important service in the public interest and in the interests of the many Australians who deserve to be able to tell their stories on their terms, without concerns about reprisals or other matters relevant to their privacy, in circumstances going to these vitally important commissions of inquiry—perhaps none more important than the one which has given rise to the need to bring this bill before the parliament, the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability. The amendments that are contained in the bill were requested quite some time ago by the commission chair, the Hon. Ronald Sackville. It is important that this request and the request of others be responded to and that we consider some of the wider circumstances. Some of these issues I'll put before the House in the form of a second reading amendment. Others, I think, have been touched upon effectively by the minister responsible for the bill in the House, setting out the extraordinary importance of those of us in this place doing all we can to ensure that the experiences of people with disability, those who care about them and those who have information relevant to their mistreatment—where they have been subjected to violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation—particularly in circumstances where these issues may be systemic, are brought before the royal commission so that its deliberations can give us the best possible picture to respond to. The bill before the House consists of one relatively short schedule. Part 1 deals with the substantive amendments to the Royal Commissions Act 2002 and part 2 with some consequential amendments relating to the Freedom of Information Act implications. The impetus for this bill was the calling of the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability in 2019. Of course, the conduct of that inquiry is governed by the Royal Commissions Act and the terms of reference given to the commission. I note in particular paragraphs (e) and (g) of those terms, which provided that the commission have regard to the following: (e) all forms of violence against, and abuse, neglect and exploitation of, people with disability, whatever the setting or context— and— (g) the specific experiences of violence against, and abuse, neglect and exploitation of, people with disability are multilayered and influenced by experiences associated with their age, sex, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, intersex status, ethnic origin or race, including the particular situation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and culturally and linguistically diverse people with disability … These provisions of course necessitated collecting evidence in the form of the stories of people's experiences in relevant settings, which led to a concern from those currently in these settings. Given the nature of this inquiry, the vast majority of those with such stories—or a large number of them, one would imagine—and their families might be disinclined to give evidence out of concern that this might lead to them being considered troublemakers or perhaps subjected to some form of unfair treatment, including breaches of their privacy. So it is important that we take appropriate steps to guard against this and also to ensure that people aren't dissuaded by these concerns from telling their stories and so depriving the commission and ultimately the Australian people of valuable perspectives and evidence. I note that similar issues arose in the course of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse and that the Royal Commissions Amendments Bill 2013 made amendments to the principal act in recognition of this. Further, in 2019, those amendments, which enabled material to be put forward and to be received by the commission in private sessions, were able to be applied in other royal commissions through the enactment of the Royal Commissions Amendment (Private Sessions) Act 2019. However, it has become apparent that these changes did not entirely resolve the issue of addressing barriers to having important witnesses come forward and having their stories be both heard and appropriately protected. Of course, ensuring the protection is critical to giving people the confidence to come forward in many circumstances. This bill seeks to address this through recognising that some information put to the commission other than through such private sessions could need to be protected, particularly once the commission has come to an end and has reported. Last year, Senator Steele-John introduced a private senator's bill in substantially similar form to this bill, and I think that is something that we should acknowledge. Now, for reasons that are not entirely clear—but I do acknowledge that some further amendments improve the legislation before us—the government has introduced its own legislation, which I am pleased to speak to and indicate Labor's support for. It is of great importance that we protect the privacy of witnesses, including whistleblowers, who are making allegations about systemic failures in this sector and, more broadly, that we encourage all those with relevant experiences to come forward and share these with confidence. I spoke about the scope of the terms of reference. When we think about those, it becomes clear how attentive we need to be when putting in place these provisions that enable all the perspectives that the commission has been asked to bring to bear to ensure that none are dissuaded from coming forward. I note that disability organisations and advocates have called for this to be better reflected. Further, I note that the Attorney-General has indicated that there is to be a wider review of the principal act to identify any impediments to people sharing information with a royal commission, and this should be an important process too. But, for this royal commission to fulfil its purpose, we do need to have in place a greater capacity to protect and assure privacy on the part of the commission. This bill does that in its amendments to the making of non-publication orders, as has been discussed, and through the broader confidentiality protections which are contained in item 5. I flagged earlier the reasons for which I thought a second reading amendment to the legislation was necessary, and I move: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes that: (a) in October 2020, the former Attorney-General, the Member for Pearce, said that the Government would 'work swiftly' to introduce these new confidentiality protections for people giving evidence to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability—protections that had been explicitly requested by the Chair of the Commission, the Hon Ronald Sackville AO QC; (b) despite that commitment, the Government did not introduce this bill until 17 March 2021; and (c) the Government also took over six months to respond to Commissioner Sackville's request for an extension to the Disability Royal Commission's reporting date; (2) is of the view that it is unacceptable, and disrespectful, for the Government to take many months to respond to requests from the Chair of the Disability Royal Commission; and (3) calls on the Government to respond promptly to any future correspondence from the Chair of the Commission". It would be remiss of me to conclude my remarks on this bill, given its subject matter and the weight of that subject matter—which you, Mr Deputy Speaker Andrews, would be very well aware of—without acknowledging the fact that, as I stand here today, many thousands of vulnerable Australians with disability are still unvaccinated against COVID-19. It is deeply concerning that, at the same time as the disability royal commission has been investigating how to better protect people with disabilities from experiencing neglect, the Morrison government's rollout of vaccinations to people with disabilities, especially those in residential care settings, has been such an abject failure. People with disabilities are amongst those Australians most vulnerable to COVID, yet barely a quarter of participants in the NDIS have reportedly been vaccinated. That is behind the national average. Much more can and will be said about this abject policy failure of the Morrison government, including, I'm sure, by the processes within the royal commission itself. Perhaps, in closing, that's a note that is worth reflecting on. It is absolutely imperative that, for the commission and, indeed, any royal commission to do its job, the best possible evidence be adduced before it. The provisions of this bill go quite some way towards not only filling a gap—a very important gap—that will enable this royal commission to do incredibly important work of advising this government and future governments and the Australian community but also recognising a future standard that must be met in ensuring that such commissions of inquiry can hear from every perspective they need to hear from. I commend the bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HK5 Is the amendment seconded? Dr Freelander 265979 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. 15:35 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I'm pleased to speak to the original bill, the Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021, which is putting in place amendments to improve the Royal Commissions Act, particularly as it applies to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse and Exploitation of People with Disability. This royal commission was established in April 2019 in response to community concern about widespread reports of violence against and the neglect, abuse and exploitation of people with disability. The disability royal commission is: investigating, preventing and better protecting people with disability from experiencing violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation; achieving best practice in reporting, investigating and responding to violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disability; and promoting a more inclusive society that supports people with disability to be independent and live free from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. The disability royal commission is investigating and reporting on experiences and conditions in all settings and contexts, including schools, workplaces, jails and detention centres, secure disability and mental health facilities, group homes, family homes, hospitals and day programs, and the incidents might have occurred recently or a long time ago. The government has committed $527 million for this royal commission, which includes funding to support people with a disability to participate in the commission. The disability royal commission is gathering information through research, public hearings and hearing about the personal experiences of people through their submissions, private sessions and other forums. As at August this year the royal commission has already undertaken significant work: 2,857 submissions have been received; over 10,000 phone inquiries have been received; 13 issues papers have been released; 605 responses to issues papers have been received; and 482 private sessions have been held. The royal commission is due to give its final report to the Australian government by 29 September 2023. However, in a commitment to full transparency, the commission is releasing six-monthly reports and has filed an interim report as at 30 October 2020. In this interim report the royal commission has identified a number of themes which have emerged as particularly pertinent to the independence of people with disability and their right to live free from violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. The themes thus far identified include choice and control, attitudes towards disability, segregation and exclusion, restrictive practices, access to services and supports, advocacy and representation, oversight and complaints, and funding. The royal commission has already highlighted that, while we have reliable data on the number of people with disability, which is roughly 4.4 million people in Australia, we do not have reliable, thorough or consistent data on neglect, violence, abuse or exploitation experienced by people with disability. This, in all likelihood, will be the subject of a royal commission recommendation. While this royal commission has already undertaken significant work and many people have already shared their stories and experiences with the royal commission, it is vital that all people feel confident and safe in coming forward to share their stories and experiences. Indeed, the letters patent for this royal commission stipulate that people with disability are central to processes that inform best-practice decision-making on what all Australian governments and others can do to prevent and respond to violence against and abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disability. Ensuring that such people are heard in this inquiry is key. Any shortfall in community confidence in the royal commission will impact upon the royal commission's ability to fulfil its obligations and, ultimately, to produce a final report which will assist all of us in the vital work needed to improve laws, policies, structures and practices to ensure a more inclusive and just society. To that end the chair of the royal commission, the Hon. Robert Sackville AO QC, has advised the government that people with disability, their families and supporters and people who identify as whistleblowers do not feel confident that the information they provide to the royal commission can remain confidential after the royal commission ends. Alongside people with disability and a range of disability advocates, including a Greens senator from my state of Western Australia, he has requested that changes to the bill be introduced to provide greater protections to all those who are participating in the royal commission. This bill implements the changes that have been requested. They have been developed following extensive consultation by the Attorney-General with the office of the disability royal commission to ensure that they align with the processes of the royal commission and that they will encourage people to come forward. In essence, this bill will extend confidentiality measures by ensuring the confidentiality of certain information given by or on behalf of individuals to the royal commission by applying limitations on the use and disclosure of that information about their or others' experiences of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation—where that information was given for purposes other than a private session and the information was treated as confidential by the commission at all times. Private sessions are an important mechanism that enables individuals to share highly sensitive and personal information in confidence. But there are other ways in which people engage with the royal commission and share sensitive and highly personal information, and they do so in the expectation that it will be kept confidential. For example, they do this by providing confidential written submissions and accounts, or through interview processes, where the royal commission needs to be satisfied that the matters fall within the terms of the inquiry or they need to discuss the potential of the giving of evidence. This information should properly receive protections similar to private session information, and that is why this bill is extending those protections to individuals engaging with the disability royal commission providing accounts of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation on a confidential basis. The proposed new clause in this bill will provide that confidential information is: … not admissible in evidence against a natural person in any civil or criminal proceedings in any court of the Commonwealth, of a State or of a Territory. Further, a provision of the law of the Commonwealth, a state or a territory will have no effect to the extent that it would otherwise require or authorise a person to make a record of, use or disclose the information. The records will be held securely by the custodian, the Secretary of the Attorney-General's Department, when the inquiry ends. A court will not be able to compel the department to disclose this information and third parties will not be able to seek this information under the freedom-of-information regime. Confidential information will only be able to be used in a report if it is de-identified or if the information is also given in evidence. These confidentiality protections apply to both individual accounts and accounts identifying systemic forms of violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation experienced by a natural person or another person. In order for the royal commission to fully realise the scope of its inquiry, it is important that the Australian community feels comfortable and supported in fully engaging with a royal commission. It is absolutely critical that people who share their lived experience with the royal commission feel respected and that they don't have any fears or concerns about what might be done with the confidential or sensitive information that they provide. Anybody who has ever appeared before a royal commission or any other form of inquiry—indeed, in front of a court process—can appreciate the fear, anxiety and concern that goes with those processes. This is particularly so if you are sharing private, personal and, in many cases, deeply distressing information, and you're doing so in the hope that it will lead to overall improvements for everybody else. You need encouragement and certainty that your confidences will not be broken. In engaging with this process and in seeking to ensure we are making a system which is better, more just and more inclusive in the future, you want to make sure that you are protected. These amendments which we are putting forward will strengthen the existing protections in the act, and remove any doubt about the safeguarding of confidential information beyond the life of the inquiry. As noted earlier, the Attorney-General has worked with the royal commission chair and office to ensure that these amendments address the issues and concerns which have been raised by the chair with respect to the comprehensive protection of sensitive information. With that, I commend this bill to the House. 15:45 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne [by video link] I'm pleased that the government has brought this bill to the House, it having passed through the Senate, because it will close a loophole that was getting in the way of people telling their stories—stories about abuse and neglect—to the disability royal commission, for fear that what they told the royal commission might not be kept confidential. Many people had a really well founded fear that, if they blew the whistle and spoke to the royal commission, they might find themselves exposed because what they told the royal commission wasn't confidential. That, it turns out, was a very well founded fear, and it was a fear that the royal commission itself shared. The royal commission said that we needed to close that loophole and change the law so that it was crystal clear that people who wanted to come and tell their stories, who wanted to come and give evidence to one of the most crucial royal commissions that have been held for some time, would be able to do so without any fear of retribution. As I said, I'm pleased that the government is bringing this bill here, but there's one person in this parliament who, above everyone else, is the reason that the government is bringing this bill here, and that is the Greens disability spokesperson, Senator Jordon Steele-John. Back in October of last year, well after having received the request from the royal commission to close this loophole, the government said that they would bring legislation forward urgently. Months passed, and nothing happened. Senator Steele-John introduced his own private member's bill, which bears a remarkable resemblance to this bill, to close that loophole. That bill gained widespread support. The government weren't prepared to support that bill, but what they did do—and I want to acknowledge this—was work with Senator Steele-John to come up with a bill that closes the loophole and will give people the confidence that they need to come forward. That bill passed the Senate unanimously, as far as I'm aware—with everyone's support—and I hope that the bill will do the same now that it is before the House. As well as giving confidence to whistleblowers and allowing people to come forward and make arrangements to talk to the royal commission in ways that they feel comfortable with and in ways that will ensure their confidence, we've also been able to secure some additional protections as part of this bill, which we're very proud to have achieved. One that has been referred to is the review that'll be conducted in a short period of time to ensure that whistleblower protections work properly. It is crucial in this country, because in other areas—not in the disability area, but in other areas—we've seen this government hound whistleblowers who've come forward to do the right thing. We've seen hounded in the past whistleblowers who have come forward and said that governments have been acting illegally or governments have been acting unfairly. That shouldn't be the case. Whistleblowers should be entitled to protection. So we're pleased that there will be a review process to ensure that this protection in here is going to do what it's meant to do. That is going to be of great benefit to everyone, including any people who want to participate in and give evidence to royal commissions. What this bill now needs is to do its job, and, for the bill to be successful, it needs to encourage people to come forward. People now need to feel comfortable that they can come forward once this has passed, and I hope they do. I say on behalf of us, as the Greens, who have been a driving force in trying to make this legislation happen, that you should now feel confident that the legislation, when it is passed—which hopefully it will be soon—will mean that you are now able to come forward and tell the story. You can tell the story on your own behalf, you can come forward and give evidence on behalf of others and you can arrange with the commissioner to do it in a way that works for you and that guarantees confidentiality. That is critically important for people who want to blow the whistle, because now you know you can come forward and you can name names, you can talk about specific incidents that have happened to you and you can also talk about the systems that have worked to discriminate against you, and you can do it in a way knowing that the law will have your back. And I presume that, once this legislation has passed through this House and comes into force, the royal commission, itself, is going to make its own announcements to give people that level of comfort as well. Having had this spoken about more forcefully in the Senate, especially being led by Senator Steele-John, I'll leave my remarks there and just say it is good that this has happened, it should have happened much sooner and it could have happened much sooner. One of the things that this shows is that when you have people like Senator Steele-John and the Greens in the Senate, who introduce private member's bills of matters of concern to the community that are otherwise trying to be put in the too-hard basket or dropped off the list, we can get results. I want to congratulate Senator Steele-John in particular and the community for people with disabilities, who worked together with him to ensure that this legislation became a reality, for pushing and pushing and pushing. This very, very significant win, this very important protection that is now being gained, is down in very large part to you. Once again, I say congratulations. 15:52 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein It's a great privilege to be able to speak in support of the Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021, as other members have done so, but without the partisan pontificating of the member for Melbourne, because this bill comes to the heart of what the government is seeking to provide—that is, assistance for Australians who have a just reason to raise legitimate grievances of abuse, neglect or violence and to make sure that in the context of the royal commission confidential information is treated with confidence to ensure that Australians with a disability who are victims of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation know with absolute confidence that their information is not going to be released without their approval, so they will be forthcoming and provide information so that the royal commission can fulfil its important role. It really shouldn't need to be said, but there is no place for violence, abuse, neglect or exploitation of people with a disability. I'm sure everybody in this House will agree that such conduct is abhorrent and it should be taken very seriously. And, like many times when we have a royal commission, we start from the basic proposition that we wish we never had the need to have one. But, for a royal commission to get to the bottom of the challenges that are faced and to make sure the issues that sit at the heart of its calling can be fulfilled, information is required. Australians need to come forward and inform the commissioner, the Hon. Ronald Sackville, to provide the information base the commission needs to make fair determinations of the problems that sit at the heart of the system. And, of course, they're both individual complaints and systemic ones. As you may recall, Deputy Speaker, we dealt with similar issues in the context of the human rights commission's inquiry into sex discrimination in this place and the need to ensure that there were proper protections in place to make sure that those who wished to bring forward allegations and confidential information could do so and know that it would not be revealed at a later point or without their permission through other processes such as freedom of information. This bill dealing with the royal commission into violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with a disability is implemented fulfilling the request by the chair of the royal commission to make sure that those people with disability and those who are also including a large number of advocates have sought these protections to make sure that that information can be brought forward. The tragedy of the need for a royal commission will lead to really what will be no doubt very confronting evidence, even if it is anonymised and de-identified. We all know that tragically there are people who do wrong against people in vulnerable situations or in vulnerable conditions. We saw that, tragically, in the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety and the recommendations that came as a direct result of that. Sadly, I doubt many of us are expecting that we won't see systemic as well as individual problems in the context of people with a disability. The protections will apply if the information was treated as confidential by the disability royal commission at all times after being provided by the royal commission. Sometimes the confidential status of information will change during the inquiry; for example a person may decide to appear at a hearing and give evidence after initially providing their story to the commission on a confidential basis, because—many members will know—many times we get approached with information, and people subsequently decide they wish to keep it confidential for their own reasons or the protection of others, or, of course, because of a concern about their own health and security. Often when it comes to matters of health, the importance of medical privacy is a key condition of concern and it can lead people to become increasingly concerned about their privacy and their safety as a consequence of the release of information publicly. There will be information that will be protected which will carry offences if revealed of up to 12 months imprisonment for the unauthorised use or disclosure of information. Any information provided will not be admissible against the person who provided it or on whose behalf the information was provided in any criminal or civil proceedings. The government amendments ensure that information which is given by a person or by another person on their behalf is not admissible in proceedings against either person. It is important that we recognise that some people may not feel confident telling their story to commissioners without these important protections and also to ensure that family members and other carers feel confident telling their stories. And people with severe or cognitive disability may be unable to give information themselves and may rely on a third party to provide their account to the royal commission. Of course, there are always challenges when we go around collecting information for important work such as this royal commission but when we do so what we critically want is a hard evidence base to inform the consideration of the royal commission and to ensure that it makes findings and recommendations that are provided both to the public but also to this parliament with the confidence that they have thoroughly and appropriately considered the weight and body of evidence available. But that only comes from courageous people who come forward and tell their story, tell their truth, and tell their lived experience as a mechanism by which we can learn and establish the basis of our empathy and where wrong has been done that there are proper steps towards accountability. If people fear providing that evidence base to the royal commission then what is deprived is not just their story and their lived experience—though it is—but the capacity to inform the royal commission so that it can make full and judicious decision-making and recommendations to this parliament, though that is also a critical part of it. But ultimately what is denied is the confidence that the public and the people of Australia will have in its recommendations. What this bill is focused on is not just giving people a pathway to provide their stories with confidence—though it is—the real strength of it is that it will build public confidence that no stone is left unturned, that the royal commission is free in its capacity to do its work, that victims of abuse or neglect and other nefarious behaviour have a chance to tell their full story and, more critically, to have a royal commission that fulfils its purpose and maintains public confidence as part of a judicial process and a legislative process to ensure that the days confronting Australians with a disability are brighter, not just because we have provided a pathway for truth-telling, not just brighter because we provide a pathway to address their concerns and understand them, but to ensure that this parliament gives full consideration of what we need to do to make sure that the wrongs of the past will not be repeated in the future. 16:00 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey This Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021 amends the way in which we treat evidence given to the royal commission into disability. For the information of the House, I chair the coalition policy committee on Indigenous families and disability. Dealing with those in our community who are disabled forms a very large part of what we do. Of course, the rollout of the NDIS has occurred almost entirely under this government. It was certainly suggested, initially, by the previous government, and the initial legislation lay there, but in fact we've moved on with it very well. There was an article today—I think it was in today's Australian—which portrays some of the dangers which lie within the budget for it. It seems to be stubbornly refusing to stay within any kinds of predictions it had at all. But I might say that 4½ million Australians, or thereabouts, are in receipt of payments from the NDIS, averaging more than $50,000 each—so people can actually work out what that means. Anyway, as a government we are committed to those with disabilities. In April 2019 we announced the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability. There is one thing a royal commission needs more than any other, and that's honest contributions from people who are affected, and it needs people to come without any fear of retribution or fear of kickback, if you like. It's very important that we protect those people. It has to be one of the most confrontational things to do. We have moved in this place previously to protect people in courts of law from having to face their accusers or abusers face-to-face. That's to protect individuals so they can't be targeted after court procedures. It's exactly the same with this royal commission bill. I have a friend who is fighting a quite high-profile and very public battle at the moment with a major national corporation. Quite frankly, it's exhausting. There are some things you cannot hide from the public view and if you elect to take that road then you have to wear it, I suppose. But I can see the toll it takes on the individual, day after day, in having to front up to accusations which can't necessarily be put to bed but which they need to keep bringing forward to establish the truth and principle behind the actions. The experience of those who give evidence at a royal commission with 'the establishment'—I shall call it that for the purposes of this debate—is often not good. They don't necessarily see people from the government, who are theoretically there to help them, as the answer and the solution. So it can take quite a lot of courage to stand up and tell your story, as it were. In the past, we've had restrictions that have applied to the use of information provided to royal commissions. But the government has been asked by a number of people working in the industry and individuals to extend the provisions in the case of this royal commission, as we have done before, and to clarify those protections. The amendment also clarifies how the royal commission can use the confidential evidence which comes before it. Personal and sensitive information does not come to the royal commission entirely by private sessions; it comes by emails or letters or conversations. So we're moving in this amendment to also ensure that that information enjoys the same protection as evidence given in person and in session. Similar clauses were drafted for the child abuse royal commission, and, essentially, the disability royal commission meets those same criteria. Now, there are some parallels in the lives of high-profile people, be they in politics, sport, business or public administration, where allegations are made, many times without substance, and the individual is drawn into a vortex demanding that they defend themselves on a daily basis. This is the same situation that I was alluding to a little earlier in this speech. This legislation is not intended to address that situation, of course. But, once again, it reminds me of the stress that individuals can come under when having to relive one of the most unpleasant experiences in their lives. What we need is for royal commission witnesses to come forward freely, and we need to minimise the stress of their contribution, which is what this legislation seeks to do. To itemise some of those things that we are aiming at, the amendment will, as I said, cover letters, emails, submissions and statements covering personal and third-party experience. It will apply to individual and systemic forms of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation. If we are wondering what systemic exploitation is, it might be the situation where someone works in the education system and they are aware that the system or individuals within the system are using the protections of that system to abuse people or take advantage of them. So it covers whistleblowers, if you like. It allows them to speak to the royal commission and not have their position and place in the organisation exposed. Unauthorised use or disclosure of information that is deemed to be kept private by the royal commission will be an offence incurring a prison term of up to 12 months, and that's a pretty fair kind of penalty I would have thought. Amendments will ensure evidence provided by or on behalf of individuals cannot be used against them in a criminal case. This brings it into line with our courts system, where the defence of self-incrimination lies at the heart of the system. This is merely being extended to people who are willingly giving evidence at the royal commission. The records of the information will not be available for open access for up to 99 years. I know, Mr Deputy Speaker Andrews, that that will give both you and I great comfort. We may see that evidence come out in public, but, speaking for myself at least, I suspect that I'll be a bit past responding to it. It seems to be a very appropriate amount of time. Pretty much anyone who is anything more than an infant at moment can assume that it's not likely to come out in their lifetime. If the royal commission wishes to use information confidentially, it can only do so when it has been de-identified. It seems as though these amendments have the support of both sides of the parliament. I think that's a very good thing. We should come together on such issues. Perhaps we should come together on more of them. But, in the case of this royal commission, it is doing good work. It is under way. It has already taken thousands of submissions, and we look forward to seeing what it has to say, even though, like other royal commissions, it may come with a rather nasty sting in the tail. In the identifying of substandard practices, they have already delivered an interim report to that effect. I commend the bill to the House. 16:09 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia In summing up, I thank all honourable members for their contributions to the debate on the Royal Commissions Amendment (Protection of Information) Bill 2021. The government takes violence against and the abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disability very seriously. All forms of violence against and abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disability are abhorrent. The government has listened to the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability, people with disability, their families and carers, and the broader Australian public about the importance of ensuring people have the confidence to come forward and tell their story. As a result, this bill provides confidentiality protections for certain sensitive information that is given to the disability royal commission by strengthening and expanding the existing protections to the Royal Commissions Act 1902 to remove any doubt about the safeguarding of confidential information beyond the life of the inquiry. It also expands existing protections in the Royal Commissions Act to provide clarity for people that a broad range of sensitive information given to the disability royal commission will be fully protected. The bill amends the act to ensure the confidentiality of certain information given by or on behalf of individuals to the disability royal commission is protected. The use and disclosure of information given by individuals to the commission about their or others' experiences of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation will be limited, where that information was given for purposes other than a private session, and the information was treated as confidential by the commissioner at all times. The amendments will provide that this category of confidential information is not admissible in evidence against a person in any civil or criminal proceedings in any court of the Commonwealth, state or territory. Further, a provision of any law of the Commonwealth, a state or a territory would have no effect to the extent that it would otherwise require or authorise a person to make a record of, use or disclose the information. In addition, it would be an offence to disclose or use this confidential information without authority. The other place also agreed to government amendments to the bill, following which the bill's protection will apply in the circumstances where information is given on behalf of another person—for example, a carer or parent giving information on behalf of a person with disability—and will also clearly cover accounts of systemic forms of violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation of people with disability, and not just individual accounts. Records of the confidential information will be held securely by the custodian, the secretary of the Attorney-General's Department, when the inquiry ends. Just like private session information, a court will be unable to compel the department to disclose this information. It will not be admissible in court proceedings and third parties will be unable to seek this information under the freedom of information regime. The bill also provides for other technical amendments which will improve the efficiency of the disability royal commission and future commissions. The bill will streamline arrangements to enable directions to be made by differently configured groups of commissioners in or outside of a royal commission hearing. This will enable the disability royal commission and future commissions to move flexibly to make urgent directions for the non-publication of sensitive information to protect the identity of a person, locations or institutions. Finally, the bill improves arrangements for Commonwealth royal commissions to communicate information and evidence obtained during the course of their inquiries with the royal commission and a commission of inquiry of a state or territory. This is an important and essential mechanism for the disability royal commission, which has been set up as a joint Commonwealth and state royal commission, established through the issue of concurrent letters patent under the respective royal commissions legislation. Currently, most evidence tendered in the Commonwealth disability royal commission must also be tendered for the concurrent state royal commissions. This is impractical and time-consuming. Streamlining these information-sharing arrangements will create important efficiencies for the disability royal commission and future royal commissions by enabling evidence tendered on behalf of the Commonwealth disability royal commission to be easily shared with all concurrent state royal commissions. The government has carefully considered the development of the bill and has closely consulted with the disability royal commission to ensure it provides comprehensive protections to sensitive information. I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate on this important bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HK5 The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Scullin has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment be disagreed to. Question agreed to. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HK5 The question now is that this bill be now read a second time. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 69 16:15 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Work Health and Safety Amendment (Norfolk Island) Bill 2021 69

Work Health and Safety Amendment (Norfolk Island) Bill 2021

Second Reading 69 16:16 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I present the explanatory memorandum to the bill and I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Work Health and Safety Amendment (Norfolk Island) Bill will clarify how the Commonwealth Work Health and Safety Act operates in relation to the Australian government's work on Norfolk Island. The Work Health and Safety Act currently has a small number of exclusions for territories that are self-governing which, at the time it was enacted in 2011, included Norfolk Island. In 2015, self-government on Norfolk Island was removed and the Australian government assumed responsibility for funding and delivering services on the island. The exclusions in the act became obsolete when Norfolk Island had its self-governing status removed. This bill will make clear that the Work Health and Safety Act applies to Commonwealth activities on Norfolk Island, which will assist the Australian government to meet its work health and safety obligations under the act. This in turn will support the promotion of the health and safety of workers and workplaces on the island. Leave granted for second reading debate to continue immediately. 16:17 Mr BURKE DYW Watson With the bill that's before the House right now, the Work Health and Safety Amendment (Norfolk Island) Bill 2021, there are three different words that come to mind—'important', 'mundane' and 'hopeless': 'important', because the changes that need to be made are important; 'mundane', because the changes that needed to be made are so simple; and 'hopeless', because this has taken six years! Let me explain first why it's important. When self-government was taken from Norfolk Island, we had to make sure that, with the Commonwealth now delivering the services, the workers there were covered by workplace health and safety laws. Workplace health and safety in any location is significant, and when you're on an island without some of the services that are available in other parts of Australia workplace health and safety is particularly significant. To make this change—that is, to guarantee that when the Commonwealth is delivering those services on Norfolk Island the workers are covered by a workplace health and safety regime—was a really important thing to do. The bit that was mundane? To do it, they had to delete the words 'Norfolk Island' in four different places and move the word 'or' from after 'Northern Territory' to before 'Northern Territory'. When you look at the bill, the bill is three pages, but even that's being generous. The first page just tells you what it's called; the second page gives you the table of contents; and the third page, the schedule, gives you the four amendments, all of which are identical: delete 'Norfolk Island'; move the word 'or'. That's all that had to be done. And yet it has taken since 2015 to find those four places where 'Norfolk Island' needs to be deleted and to find those four places where you need to move the word 'or'. It has taken since 2015 for this to occur. If it was one of those things like the old bills that the now Treasurer used to bring in when he was a parliamentary secretary—they were brought in as though they were getting rid of red tape, but it was actually removing commas; it was a war on punctuation, and ultimately it didn't change anything. This legislation does change something. It does determine whether or not workers are protected. And it was not complex legislation to be drafted. We've waited six years. I'm not going to delay this a moment longer. It's a terrible reflection on the government—both for their lack of respect for the people of Norfolk Island and for the lack of respect for any worker who had to go there—that they've been willing to neglect this for so long. 16:21 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia The Work Health and Safety Amendment (Norfolk Island) Bill 2021 will clarify how the Commonwealth Work Health and Safety Act applies to the Australian government's activities on Norfolk Island. It does this by removing obsolete exclusions for Norfolk Island from the Commonwealth Work Health and Safety Act. The amendments in the bill will ensure that all persons involved in Commonwealth work on Norfolk Island understand how the Work Health and Safety Act applies. For example, it will make clear to local entities engaged by the Commonwealth that they need to assist the Commonwealth to comply with its work health and safety obligations under the Commonwealth act. This will assist the Australian government to meet its work health and safety obligations under the act in relation to Norfolk Island. This will in turn foster the advancement of health and safety in workplaces on the island. This bill is a small reform but an important one that reflects the government's ongoing commitment to protecting workers and other persons against harm to their health, safety and welfare through the elimination or minimisation of risks arising from work. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 70 16:22 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Cost Recovery and Other Measures) Bill 2021, Education Services for Overseas Students (Registration Charges) Amendment Bill 2021, Education Services for Overseas Students (TPS Levies) Amendment Bill 2021, Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Subsidy) Bill 2021, Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (Charges) Amendment Bill 2021 71

Education Services for Overseas Students Amendment (Cost Recovery and Other Measures) Bill 2021

Education Services for Overseas Students (Registration Charges) Amendment Bill 2021

Education Services for Overseas Students (TPS Levies) Amendment Bill 2021

Family Assistance Legislation Amendment (Child Care Subsidy) Bill 2021

Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (Charges) Amendment Bill 2021

Assent 71 Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 71

Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021

First Reading 71 Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021 71

Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021

Second Reading 71 16:24 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I rise today to speak on the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry, Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021. Like the previous speaker said, it's really too little, too late for this government. Like the bill that was before the House earlier on today, the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021 is pretty mundane, but in fact it is very important. It has taken this government over six years to get anything to the parliament about it. It's a real indictment of the government. It also goes with their changes earlier this year to the patent laws, making severe changes to the innovation patents, which have severely affected Australian innovative companies, particularly some in my electorate. I have been writing to several ministers—at present, Minister Porter, the Minister for Industry, Science and Technology—about these changes and the damage they're doing to some very innovative companies in my electorate of Macarthur, particularly DECO Group, which is a very innovative company using incredibly modern and new technology to provide coatings on metals that we are now used to seeing—in particular, things like writing and wood coatings on metal that we see at train stations and on new buildings. They produce non-flammable cladding for buildings that are all around our capital cities. Unfortunately, they're being targeted by overseas companies—in particular, Chinese companies—that are dumping things in Australia that are not as good as our technology but at much cheaper prices. They are really damaging our very innovative companies. I'm pleased that I have the opportunity to speak on this bill. It's a critical piece of legislation because it is also legislation that will help our companies better target their research and development budgets. It's very important for new companies that are springing up around my electorate of Macarthur, which is in the south-west reaches of Sydney. We've clearly been severely impacted by the pandemic. Our new businesses have really been keeping us going in this very difficult time. We've had to deal with the bushfires, floods and the pandemic, as I mentioned. We've had a really challenging few years. I commenced my local campaign, kickstart Macarthur, last year, petitioning the government to invest in our region, particularly in our innovative companies, to support jobs and support innovation. Some people may not be aware of this, but my electorate is home to some really amazing new businesses. Our manufacturing industry is one sector of Macarthur's local economy that I'm exceptionally proud of. I'm proud of the people who work in these companies. You may not be aware, but a large part of our defence manufacturing comes from Macarthur. There are companies that produce weapons and weapons mountings in my electorate. There are manufacturers that use advanced and very sought-after technology to produce, as I've mentioned, aluminium cladding, other metal cladding and products for medical industries. I should mention that Professor Graeme Clark, the inventor of the bionic ear, came from my electorate of Macarthur. That's where he grew up. We're very, very proud of that. We have other industries that have followed him in medical technology. We have wonderful, wonderful new companies. Our industries greatly contribute to our local employment and interact very effectively with our high school educators to try and get young Australians coming in to the manufacturing industry. Manufacturing is certainly not dead in Australia and neither is science, with a very active university and university medical school as well. In spite of the significant hurdles local employers have had to overcome in recent years, they continue to provide employment and incomes to Macarthur families. Unfortunately, they continue to be let down by this government. I've long been petitioning the government to invest heavily in my region, and those opposite have consistently turned a blind eye to the needs of my rapidly growing community by refusing to invest in basic infrastructure and services that we need in Macarthur. I've spoken many a time about the desperately needed rail line that will link my community to the new Western Sydney airport. The Western Sydney airport will not only take passengers to and from Australia; it will also take freight—particularly from our burgeoning agricultural sector, from our small businesses and from our manufacturing industry—to the rest of the world. I look forward to the day when we can have great transport infrastructure that links Macarthur to the rest of the world, because I have no doubt that we have products they want. Many a time I have spoken about the desperately needed railway line that will link my community to the airport and to the world; but there are too many other projects that this government is funding in other areas and not in my electorate, despite it being one of the fastest-growing and most dynamic electorates in the country. I will come to the content of the bill shortly, but one clear way those opposite could support the growing industries of Macarthur is to actually begin investing in it. Those opposite would prefer to fund millions of dollars to provide parks in affluent areas like Hornsby. They are spending over $70 million for a park in North Sydney. What a joke! And they give grants to lucrative sporting clubs, golf clubs and sailing clubs, without investing in the basics for my rapidly growing community. I'm a big believer in science and I'm a big believer in the social determinants of health as well, and these are being ignored in my electorate. These are all interrelated, and the government must be held to account for their failure to invest in my region and, ultimately, its people and future. This legislation is more of the same from this tired, eight-year-old government that doesn't really know what to do. Those opposite would have you believe, through their spin, that this is a government heavily investing in science and supporting industry. Alas, this legislation does nothing of the sort. What we are debating is essentially a single word to change the name of a government board. We are adding the word 'industry' to Innovation and Science Australia, but those opposite have little time or care for innovation. If they cared for innovation, and cared for industry and jobs, they would be supporting the many local industries not just in my electorate but in other outer suburban electorates and elsewhere, and they would support those firms and those employers that reside in growth areas such as Macarthur. The bill before the House does nothing to advance the interests of industry, increase innovation or prioritise scientific research. And that is what they should be doing. There is a pattern here. From their changes to the innovation patents, which occurred without proper consultation and without a proper understanding of the effects, to the changes they've brought in with the industry research and development amendment, they show a basic lack of understanding of what is important here: innovation, research and science to help our local companies, our very innovative companies, to provide research and to provide jobs for our future Australians, for our young Australians. It's all spin and slogans from that side, and very little substance. They don't understand the basics of science innovation. Science is something the government lacks any real policy on. Australia is home to some of the best universities in the world, ranking sixth overall for the quality of our universities. However, according to the Global Innovation Index, Australia is ranked 23rd among the 49 high-income economies and we have gone back three positions since 2018. On this index, Australia scores at well below average for knowledge and technology outputs. Since the coalition entered office, Australia has lost over 90,000 jobs in Australian manufacturing. There are 140,000 fewer people doing an apprenticeship or traineeship than there were seven years ago. Labor agrees that the government needs to think more about the links between industry, innovation and science. The facts are quite clear: we're falling behind. This is a real problem for young Australians—that includes my children and my grandchildren—and we must do better. If the Morrison government spent as much time addressing the problems they've created as they do on marketing slogans and focus groups, Australia would not be falling behind in areas where we should have a comparative advantage. Labor has a plan for building Australian industry, innovation and science that is more than just spin. We understand and value the critical role science and innovation play in preparing our economy and our industry for the future. It's not just things like the bionic ear that Australia has done so well on in the past. In medicine, we were part of the story of the invention of antibiotics, of penicillin, with Howard Florey. There was the cochlear implant, which I've mentioned. We talk about things like the black box flight recorder, polymer banknotes, and Gardasil HPV immunisation for the prevention of cervical cancer. We've had many, many innovative companies and many, many great scientists that we need to support, and this needs to go to the future. We can't just stop where we are; we have to push ahead and we have to do better. Australian scientists and innovators deserve better than being told by the Prime Minister: 'We've got the best plan. Take it on board.' We haven't got the best plan. We need to do better for the future. We need to import ideas and invest in ideas. We need to invest in research and development, and just focusing on trivial name changes is a very poor strategy. This bill does very little other than focus our attention on how poor this government has been in innovation and on science. We need to do better with our outcomes and we need to focus on every innovative Australian company that we can find in each electorate around Australia and provide them with the support and encouragement to do better, to develop their ideas, to provide employment and to get our young people investing in sciences and doing what they can to move Australia forward. We can't rest on our laurels. We're not just a country that digs things out of the ground and plants things and grows them; we are a country that grows ideas and uses science to advance us towards the future. We support this bill, but much, much more needs to be done. I thank the House. 16:37 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I have to start these remarks on the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021 with disappointment resulting from the comments of the previous speaker, who firstly dismissed our primary industries and said we need not care for sectors like mining and agriculture—those that create the wealth of the nation. In fact, they're the ones that empower innovation. One of the biggest sectors that we have is mining technology, which enables those sectors to be globally competitive, to more efficiently use the world's scarce resources and to be productive. Even without those sectors, we would lack the capacity to excel in some innovative sectors, but they create the wealth that supports so much of the rest of the economy. The basic foundation of an economy starts with primary industries and builds up in manufacturing, particularly an advanced manufacturing base, and enlivens the services sector, which is all funded from the wealth created by primary industries. So it disappoints me that we have to start here, but this ultimately goes to the heart of the challenges for the Labor Party, because not only are they poor managers of matters like the nation's finances; they don't understand how the economy is structured and how wealth is created so that we can enjoy the bounty of our nation. If you want an innovative country, you need to realise the opportunities from your natural bounty and take advantage of them in an efficient way but, more critically, utilise that wealth for the growth of other sectors of the economy, increasingly in an environmentally sustainable way. We do deeply care about the environment and our sense of stewardship to it, but we do this because the efficient use of the world's scarce resources is better for productivity, better for capital growth, better for efficiency and, increasingly—as the member for Brisbane, the Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management, will tell us—is better around the role of a circular economy, where we can repurpose so much of what we have used and disused to be able to build a future in a more environmentally sustainable, economically growth-forward agenda. Let's face it: in the end, this bill doesn't do anything particularly significant, but it's still required to be legislatively done by adding the extra I into the acronym of IISA. Perhaps it's to ensure it's not confused with that dubious and increasingly—what would you call it?—abandoned-ship organisation Industry Super Australia. You wouldn't want to confuse it with that. IISA is obviously focused on the innovation industry and the capacity to advance economic growth and scientific research, and the commercialisation of it in our great country. One of the strengths of our innovation model in this country is that we don't look to this chamber and think that all answers happen here, or even that it all occurs in big corporates. We realise that the nucleus of innovation often comes from individuals or small groups of people working collaboratively together to address modern challenges. Innovative industry goes to the heart of what we want to see for the growth of our economy, because it matters so much for the future of our economy, particularly against the backdrop of changing structures and supply chains, particularly in the context of advanced manufacturing. I'm sure you will recall, Deputy Speaker Wallace, an extensive paper was written on this last year for ASPI. I'm quite interested in the topic and how there is a shift in the supply chains, particularly in advanced manufacturing, and the limitations and issues that expose Australia to resource constraints in particular, but also to make sure there is a broader hedging of risk. Not all supply chains go through one nation, which risks not just disruption in areas like those that we experienced last year with PPE and pharmaceuticals, so we need to be more economically resilient as a country in working with other nations where they're less likely to disrupt our supply chains and more likely to share our values, and we're in a position to provide reliability for them as well as for ourselves. That goes to the heart of what the Morrison government is focusing on in Modern Manufacturing Strategy—recognising that having that domestic capability in some sectors is not just critical today, but is going to be even more critical in the future as those supply chain vulnerabilities present themselves in a global economy. Now, we are not protectionists on this side of the chamber, Deputy Speaker. I'm sure I see you nod in agreement. We are not protectionists on this side of the chamber, but we also— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 I couldn't possibly nod while I'm in the chair. I'm in a position of impartiality. Mr TIM WILSON IMW I have taken the metaphorical or interpretive nod from you, Mr Deputy Speaker. We are not protectionists on this side of the chamber. I'll leave the other side of the chamber to talk about whether they're protectionists or not. It has never been totally clear when you look at their history, particularly some of the scandalous behaviour in the early part of the 20th century and their adoption of not just capital protection of industry, but protection around keeping some people, based on the ethnicity and the colour of their skin, out of the country—particularly through the use of the trade union movement, as a political weapon. We are not protectionists in this country. We believe that Australia's economic capacity is built on us being competitive, is built on us harnessing our natural endowment, and, of course, value adding to the sector in a competitive way. We rely on countries that are also free trade nations—or, I should say, freer trade nations—to be part of our growth model, because we can't do everything well. There are some things we do exceptionally well, and we want to share that with the world. This is a simple observation, but countries that trade tend to do a lot better than those who seek to indulge in protectionism. But that doesn't change the fact that we do face challenges around supply chains, around choking points that can exist and particularly around making sure that, through geography as well as broader geostrategic political risks—pandemics and health security risks—we hedge our bets to make sure we are in a resilient position. Of course, domestic industry build-up is going to be a critical part of that. The previous speaker, the member for Macarthur, despite his disappointing reflections on sectors like mining and agriculture, did acknowledge that a sovereign capacity is going to be important, and some of it is located in his electorate, in the context of defence and defence manufacturing, and the role that can play as part of our national security framework. Of course we've seen discussions and measures implemented by this government in this term of parliament around broadening the base of fuel security so that both our Defence Force and our civilian capacities are increased against the challenges we may face with external risks and threats. And of course there's the advanced manufacturing strategy which is being pursued by the government. That is to say that even when there are sectors where we perform very well or where we have natural endowments in emerging sectors, like rare earths, we put the policy framework in place to make sure that we can realise everything we as a country want to be in terms of building the opportunities for the 21st century. Sitting behind that is going to be a critical understanding not just of how we grow the economy in a way which doesn't foster or pander to protectionism but which does take advantage of our knowledge and our skills, and that this government, this parliament and our nation can back those who want to be part of building the next chapter in the global economy—with Australia at the forefront. Of course, this isn't just in the sectors I have outlined. One of the critical parts of that conversation is in the energy environment. We have gone through long debates in this chamber and in the other place—and, of course, in the public square—about the future of the Australian energy market and Australia's energy resilience as we have seen a shift and transition away from the traditional dependence on brown and black coal, which were a critical part of our past and are a continuing part of our present but which are a diminishing share of our future. We have seen the rise of other technologies which can make us an energy exporter. We can continue to adapt, obviously, not just to the power of technology and innovation, and what those can do for Australia as an exporter. More critically, those are going to become an increasing part of consumer and business demand into the future so that they can meet other obligations, including reduced emissions profiles and economic competitiveness. There will also be an environment where energy is likely to change in its cost profile. In some places it's going to be more efficient if we harness the potential of cheap energy which costs less to transport—we might be in the position to build domestic sectors off that. We can all be proud of that and maybe replace some of the jobs which may be offset by other parts where there is a decrease in demand over time. That's why we should always be optimists about the future. The future is going to be awesome off the back of technological advancement and change. The only thing that holds us back is whether we are prepared to run to it and embrace it, to see what it can do and how we can be part of leading that change to make sure that we build a better Australian economy for the future. That's what this bill is ultimately about. It's making sure that its focus is squarely put on the importance of industry, innovation and science for Australia so that we have an organisation that's looking into sectors where Australia can excel, where we can continue to contribute and where we can leverage existing sectors that we have. IISA—again, not to be confused with that nefarious body Industry Super Australia—will continue to complement and be informed by the work of other advisory bodies, such as the National Science and Technology Council, with a focus on the needs of business, to support greater uptake and development of new technologies, products and services. I think that this broader strategic shift, as well as what's in the legislative proposal before us today, is of such critical importance because, when I look over my entire parliamentary career, we've had issues—without seeking to diminish them at all—which are cyclical, or which we might come across as the result of events or fads. When I say 'fads' I mean that events might lead people to suddenly get very exercised about an issue at a particular point in time. They might write to me or to the member for Barker, or even to you, Deputy Speaker Wallace, and have very strong views and want parliamentary action. Of course, I don't take anything away from those issues; they're of the utmost importance and, where we confront them, hopefully, we address them. But in almost every space where we get a sustained interest—at least from the wonderful residents of Goldstein—it's largely about how we utilise technology to be part of securing and building Australia's future. I always have enormous sympathy for being a very strong friend of technological innovation and its capacity to be part of owning the future, growing jobs, building industry and being on the side of the future of the country—not just for ourselves but for our children and our grandchildren. We don't just want to respond to the times; we want to lead them, we want to charge and we want to make sure that we're not just seeing the terms for ourselves but in the global economy so we can take full advantage of it. One of the areas where I also get a lot of feedback, as many members no doubt do, is in the space around Australian security and the tension that exists in that nexus between being open, free and competitive while also ensuring we protect our nation. As I said right at the start, a critical part of that conversation was exposed last year as a result of the pandemic and the challenges of supply chains going principally through a single country. Thankfully the drift was already there towards regionalisation of supply chains to address those emerging risks, not just for the pandemic but also for the economic risks and the like. What we know, at least on this side of the parliament, is risk is there to be managed; it is not there to be something that we wish to try and pretend we can make disappear. We know that risk has to be managed, and one of the worst ways to manage risk is to take on all responsibility and think you can do everything in isolation. As a country, you can't, because you might lack the skills, the knowledge, the primary inputs and, of course, the intellectual capital that comes with it as well as the manufacturing base. We know we rely on others to do so successfully, so hedging risk means working with others. The objective of this bill focusing on industry and innovation is to make sure that Australia is part of the global cooperate effort of defining the future. We will do that by making sure we are a strong nation in our own right. Poor countries are weak countries; rich ones are strong. We back Australia every step of the way, not just our own potential, our ingenuity, our innovation, our capacity, but our people, those who are innovators, those who are business people, those who commercialise and develop and sell products, goods and services that help enrich our country. When they look at this parliament, they have a choice. They can look at the Labor Party and see a political movement that is interested in harvesting them for their knowledge and skills for their own benefit, whereas we on this side are interested in backing them for their success. (Time expired) 16:52 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth [by video link] This Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021 will put the word 'industry' back into Innovation and Science Australia. It is a renaming bill. It is not particularly exciting but it is this government's priority. It means that Industry Innovation and Science Australia will join a long list of famous name changes. The Quarrymen became the Beatles. Robert Zimmerman became Bob Dylan. Reginald White became Elton John. Prince became an unpronounceable symbol. The Cockroaches became The Wiggles and then they became woke, and now Innovation and Science Australia will become Industry Innovation and Science Australia. I'm looking forward to the first album! But unfortunately this bill does little else. It's typical of this government—a failure to give Australian industry and manufacturing the support they need. It's another bill where we see a lot of talk but very little action. The opportunities that come from greater investment in innovation and industry, in more Australian manufacturing, are obvious. But, unfortunately, when it comes to this government you always have to spell out the obvious, and what is obvious is that you can't be a nation-building government unless you look at the success of previous nation-building governments: the Whitlam government—sewerage through the suburbs of Western Sydney; the Hawke and Keating government—reforming our industry so that you can have a proper open economy where Australian manufacturing can be part of that global economy; and the Ruddock and Gillard governments, who did, unlike the government that followed them, support the Australian automotive manufacturing industry. I believe that Australia needs to be a country that makes things again. Growth in manufacturing will benefit all Australians. It's one of Australia's most evenly distributed industries, accounting for almost seven per cent of jobs in every state. Every state has a manufacturing industry base that employs hundreds of thousands of people across our country. When we look at what we want to achieve when it comes to diversification of our international trade, we know that most international trade is manufacturing related. Manufactured products accounted for over 70 per cent of global merchandise trade in 2018. The manufacturing trade is worth some US$14 trillion. Manufacturing is the missing piece of the Australian economy. We are No. 1 when it comes to the export of iron ore; we're No. 2 when it comes to aluminium ores, zinc and lead; No. 3 when it comes to exporting copper, in terms of value; and we have four of the top seven universities internationally for mining engineering. Manufacturing is that missing middle bit. We lead the world in producing the inputs that go into manufactured resources. We lead the world when it comes to educating people on how to deal with those resources. But we are so far behind when it comes to using the resources that we mine, many of which are mined in the great state of Western Australia. So we need a federal government that has a comprehensive plan. The world wants to invest in Australia: in 2020, foreign investment in Australia was some $3,990 billion, a $97 billion increase on the year before. What do we need from the federal government? We need a federal government that properly invests at scale in Australia. With just seven per cent, manufacturing accounts for a smaller share of national employment in Australia than it does in any other OECD economy. What we've seen since the turn of the century is that manufacturing has lost close to 200,000 jobs in Australia. A study from Harvard University and their Growth Lab ranked the most complex economies in the world. On that complexity scale, Australia ranked 93rd, just above Pakistan and behind Morocco, Uganda and Senegal. Since 2000, we've fallen 29 places. We are going backwards at a very, very rapid rate. When it comes to manufacturing self-sufficiency, Australia ranks last among OECD nations. Our imports of all manufactures are about three times bigger than our exports. We had a manufacturing trade deficit of over $180 billion in 2019. That's where we are right now. Despite this, Australia's manufacturers are ready. They make a disproportionately high contribution to national trade performance. We saw that manufactured product accounted for some $95 billion in export sales in 2019, and we know that if we get manufacturing right for the future that's what's going to give young Australians the job opportunities they want. Despite the talk we have from the Treasurer and others about how great the job market is, we know that it's young people who are not going to have those high-paid jobs if we don't take action, if we don't invest in the sorts of new industries and new opportunities that give young people the secure, good-quality jobs that they so much deserve. When it comes to how we make sure we create those opportunities, we start with the 900,000 Australians working in manufacturing, but it's an ageing industry. The average age of Australians working in the manufacturing industry is 42, two years older than the average Australian worker; 45 per cent of Australian manufacturing workers are over the age of 45; and 20 per cent are over the age of 55. We know that, as we see in some of the industries in the care economy, we're going to have massive deficits through not having enough skilled workers just to keep things as they are, let alone to grow these industries for the future. Again, they are good-quality jobs: 85 per cent of jobs in manufacturing are full time, and people who work in manufacturing earn seven per cent more than average earnings. More manufacturing in Australia means higher quality, better paying jobs in Australia and more opportunities for young Australians. When it comes to the outcomes of increasing our manufacturing investment, most countries consume as much manufacturing as they produce, but Australia doesn't—that is, we have a deficit of what we manufacture. The Australia Institute estimates that if we increased our manufacturing to the global standards we'd have $180 billion a year more in new manufacturing output, $80 billion a year in new manufacturing added-value growth and some 400,000 new, direct jobs in manufacturing. This is the opportunity that's in front of us. It's not going to happen by renaming a department; it's not going to happen just by hope or leaving it entirely to the free market. We know that the countries that have high-quality manufacturing, innovation and industry sectors are the ones where the government works hand in hand with industry. When it comes to Labor's plans, when it comes to the alternatives where it's a bit more than just renaming a piece of legislation or renaming a department, Labor has a clear plan to support industry: a national reconstruction fund. The fund will make sure we rebuild Australia after COVID. It is a plan for the future. It will create a $15 billion capital pool that has the potential to unlock $30 billion or more in investment. It will leverage private contributions and make sure businesses are eligible for loans, equity core investments or guarantees for projects. And what do those projects need to do? They need to deliver strong, good-quality jobs for Australians. We know that, while we might have low unemployment rates, around two million people are looking for more work. These are the underemployed Australians, who do not have the level of income or the job security from the work they are currently doing that they would like to see in the workplace right now. Manufacturing is so important for that. Government needs to play an active role. We have just been through the biggest economic shock in a century. It's time the government played an active role, just as we did after World War II and, indeed, just as the Rudd and Gillard governments did as we responded to the global financial crisis. Get in there, lend a helping hand and make sure that we build something that lasts for the future. That's the Labor way. A Labor government will partner with businesses to create well-paid, secure jobs. The national reconstruction fund could be the difference between job-creating projects happening or not. If we have a choice between creating jobs for people, getting more people into high-paid, secure jobs or not, we should always lean on the side of taking action. I speak here from Western Australia—from the cave. Western Australia does have an economic success story. We have good news to share with the nation. Thanks to the ability to keep COVID out of resources and mining, and the energy industry that's been able to continue and stay strong despite what we've seen happen with mining projects and resources projects across the world, which really have suffered during COVID, the Western Australian economy contributes well and above our 10 per cent of population. That's well known to people here in WA. We contribute 16 per cent of Australia's GDP. WA's gross state product is 54 per cent higher than Australia's average state GDP but just four per cent comes from manufacturing. There is so much more potential here. Leveraging the skills, leveraging the investment and leveraging the trade relationships that our mining and resources industry has and turning that into that advanced, elaborately transformed manufacture means that we have more industry for the future. What we know—and we know it here in Western Australia more than elsewhere—is that commodity prices fluctuate, but the ability to retain value, making sure that you support industry, and transform it into a world-leading product that other countries and other businesses want to buy is where economic success lies. There are also opportunities when it comes to manufacturing and industry with the resources sector. It's projected that this year Australia's resource and energy exports will be some $300 billion—our largest export industry—but mostly shipped overseas for processing. It's projected that lithium exports will increase fivefold between now and 2025. But we're not doing the processing of lithium or any of the value adding here—another missed opportunity where we could use those great Australian scientists, engineers and chemical engineers to make sure that we are investing in ourselves and capturing more of that value here. The other opportunity, of course, is in renewables and hydrogen. Currently, some 95 per cent of the world's hydrogen production is not renewable hydrogen. The opportunity for Australia to be a renewable hydrogen powerhouse of the world is one that should not be missed. We will always be a net energy exporter. Let's make sure that we're exporting the energy of the future and planning for that now. The Clean Energy Finance Corporation estimates that by 2050 the global revenue from hydrogen could be some US$2.5 trillion per year, and it's up to all of us in this parliament to make sure that we are investing to make sure that we are able to capture as much of that value chain as possible in the years ahead. I would also like to note that there are a lot of people who've put good, carefully thought-through ideas to the government about how you can do more about investing in WA jobs and in manufacturing here and across the country. I would particularly like to note the work of the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, who have consistently put out plans for jobs and plans to revive Australian manufacturing. I remember when Treasurer Hockey dared GM-Holden to leave Australia, and indeed they did. When you send a message like that to global manufacturers, they pick up on those signals. But, despite these really heartbreaking pieces of feedback that people in the manufacturing industry have had from this government at times, the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union continues to put forward plans for WA jobs and to revive manufacturing in this country. We've seen an amazing success story in the work that's been done out at Bellevue, which I was fortunate enough to visit with the member for Ballarat a few months ago and where we're now making Western Australia's trains here in Western Australia again. We're not having to rely on purchasing them from overseas, which I know has been an absolute disaster in other states, where they have trains that haven't been the right shape or the right size for their platforms or their tunnels. What we have is about 200 Western Australians working here, making train cars that Western Australians are going to ride on. There's really exciting hope. I would encourage the minister who's sitting at the table to make sure that we continue to talk to the resources sector and the mining sector about how we make sure that we get more of that Australian manufacturing into our mining industry. We know that there's thousands and thousands of kilometres of train track. There are thousands of cars that are moving ore and other things across this state and across our country. The more those are made by Australians in Australia, the better, and the more we can again capture value for manufacturing here in Australia. I will just finish by saying there's one other thing that we should be manufacturing here in Australia. The legislation I wish we were debating would be about how we get mRNA manufacturing happening here in Australia. Currently we have the ability to manufacture one great vaccine, the AstraZeneca vaccine, but it's not building that capacity for the future. Getting into the mRNA business is the future, and this government needs to get onto it today. (Time expired) 17:07 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper If we've learnt one thing from COVID, it's that it has put many things into perspective and has really enhanced a sharper focus on our local communities around Australia and, most acutely, on the need to build Australian resilience by securing sovereign capability and capacity for the national interest. In the words of the member for Goldstein, a rich country is a strong country, and I couldn't agree with him more. Australian industry as a whole needs to scale up in order to achieve this. Sometimes we see silver linings out of devastating circumstances, and this is a silver lining that we can see from COVID. I can guarantee you that most teenagers prior to this pandemic would never have heard the word 'sovereignty'—sovereignty of our borders, sovereignty of our people and sovereignty of our manufacturing industry. We've recognised through that adversity that we must lay the groundwork now to become more competitive and self-sufficient in order to cement our nation's job security not just in the short term but, importantly, for future generations. We saw the $1.5 billion Modern Manufacturing Strategy established by this government in October 2020, specifically for that purpose—specifically for our future generations, to supercharge our manufacturing industry. To date, ISA has made an important contribution to furthering Australia's innovation in science capabilities and has helped inform the government's investment strategy to enhance Australia's science, technology and innovation capabilities. The potential for ISA to more broadly advise the government around strategic investment has been restricted to date. This bill, the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021, seeks to expand ISA's remit and update its name to Industry Innovation and Science Australia. This change of name is part of a broader policy reform to focus on Australian industry as a whole. The change of name will bring with it the appointment of new board members, a new statement of expectations and the critical provision of advice to government on the Modern Manufacturing Strategy—again, a good result, a silver lining to difficult circumstances. IISA's advice will continue to complement and be informed by the work of other advisory bodies such as the National Science and Technology Council, but, importantly, it will now specifically focus on the needs of businesses to support greater uptake and development of new technologies, products and services. We know businesses are the backbone of the Australian economy. The introduction of this bill provides the opportunity to highlight what this government has already done in recent months to propel Australia's competitive advantage to new heights through strategic investment in science, technology and innovation. The 2021 budget, announced in October last year, made a record investment of $11.9 billion in science research and innovation. It should be noted that this represents hundreds of millions of dollars more than when the opposition was last in government. The 2021 budget has continued to expand on this, with investments including $116.7 million in continued support for the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, to maintain Australia's sovereign nuclear science and medicine manufacturing capabilities, and over $42.4 million over seven years to boost the next generation of women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. I'm very pleased to say that I get involved every year with the Girls in STEM in Port Macquarie and Coffs Harbour—its first year was a huge success at the Charles Sturt University campus—and I will continue to champion that cause. It gets bigger and bigger every year, and we need to see more girls and more women in science, maths and technology. Importantly, the government is committed to improving Australians' digital skills, with an investment of over $100 million to create education options for reskilling and upskilling for the current market of in-demand jobs. This government's investment will continue to underpin a strong research and intellectual capital base and support the commercialisation of good ideas—good ideas like the world-leading innovations already in this country, including wi-fi technology, the bionic ear and the vaccine for cervical cancer. We have the expertise, the drive and the know-how, and this bill is a step towards ensuring that we have the human capital and physical infrastructure to locally deliver on ideas like these into the future. This place quite often presents opportunities and experiences that you wouldn't ordinarily see outside of this place. I'm privileged enough to be on the Standing Committee on Industry, Innovation, Science and Resources, previously chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister. We have recently completed an inquiry into space. When thinking about space, one often thinks that it's a group of intellectuals in a room, working on a chart with mathematical equations that nobody understands. What this inquiry showed the committee was that space is the future and that there are opportunities for our future generations not just in engineering but in electrical, in design and in computing, and the vast evidence was that we cannot get enough people. We cannot get enough youth into the space industry, because they think of that whiteboard with those mathematical equations. On the day when the rover Perseverance landed on Mars, we had a tour of the Australian Space Agency and we spoke to the people who work there. Some of them were electricians and some of them were engineers. But what it said to us was: for future generations, the opportunity is there for you. The opportunity is there to be able to make a difference in the future. When we think about space, we think about satellites. To simplify it, the satellites are up there driving your wi-fi and driving the tractors out in western New South Wales with nobody in them: that is the future. At the moment, there are fewer than 1,000 satellites in the sky; within a decade, there will be over 100,000 satellites going around this globe. So you do get that privilege, and this is something that we as a government and we as a nation need to harness to become that economically strong force and that economically strong country. One of the other things that you get to see are the local examples: those tiny little factories tucked away in the industrial centres that you may drive past day after day and not know what's in there. One example is a company called Blue Bins in Port Macquarie. Over 90 per cent of landfill comes from construction and renovations and building materials going into the ground. This company, through their hard work, has reduced that from over 90 per cent to 12 per cent by recycling that material and putting that back into the building industry. So not only are they saving on landfill; what they're actually doing by recycling is limiting the amount of timber and plastic that's required. Day after day, you see industries such as that. Through the government's funding and programs, we need to harness these to ensure that we can use best practice and ensure that these companies can thrive and create jobs in our economy. Over the last month in my electorate of Cowper, I've seen this government's investment in a paper and oil recycling program. Coffs Harbour Paper and Oil received joint federal and state government funding totalling $636,000 under the Recycling Modernisation Fund. This project is specifically about easing pressure on our environment by recycling more materials including plastics, tyres, glass, cardboard and even coffee cups. Importantly, it is about creating jobs and economic investment. This project alone will increase the state's recycling capacity by an estimated 120,000 tonnes every year. This is an example of the $190 million investment into the Recycling Modernisation Fund which will create approximately 10,000 new jobs over the next 10 years across Australia. I'm also proud to say that Cowper is the home to Louise Hardman, who is a scientist, inventor, innovator and waste-free plastics educator, and who is New South Wales' Local Hero nominee in this year's Australian of the Year Awards. Louise founded Plastic Collective, a social enterprise to stop plastics entering our oceans. Plastic Collective is changing the way people think about plastics. Louise is an expert in grassroots community engagement, the chemistry of plastic and the circular economy. She invented the shruder, a mobile recycling machine that shreds and extrudes plastic onsite. Using the shruder and Louise's working with plastics program, communities are transforming plastic waste into products for local needs and generating revenue through selling processed plastic shred. This was made possible by the almost $2.5 million provided to Plastic Collective as part of the Cooperative Research Centres Program. This same program awarded $950,000 to local winery Cassegrain Wines, and I can attest to the high quality of their wines. The 2019-20 bushfires affected prominent wine regions in the ACT, New South Wales, South Australia and Victoria. Without scientifically proven treatments for smoke taint, the issue remains an ongoing threat to the long-term economic viability of the Australian wine industry. Vineyard exposure to bushfire smoke can taint grapes, and therefore wine, due to the unpalatable smoky ashy characters leading to revenue losses in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The funding has provided the ability to evaluate promising strategies for mitigating smoke taint, including novel winemaking additives and treatment processes that remove smoke compounds from the wine, therefore reducing the sensory perception of smoke taint. Outcomes from this research will provide economic and social benefits to the industry. By playing to our strengths, strategically investing and harnessing our own homegrown, world-class science and research, we can build our national resilience into a stronger economy and take more of our quality products to the world rather than relying on others to manufacture for us. I expect there to be no opposition to this critical amendment to the industry research and development bill. There has never been a more paramount time to ensure Australia's future success by creating the framework from which the Modern Manufacturing Strategy can truly impact Australian opportunities now and into the future. 17:22 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I'm going to begin by dissuading the House of a myth, or at least establishing a fact. That is, as the member for Barker, I represent a division in this place that enjoys the title of employing in the electorate more full-time equivalent employees by head of population in manufacturing than in any other division in this place. It's an important title and it's one we don't speak about enough, or at least others don't. I certainly do take the opportunity to point out that, in terms of the league table on that particular matrix, Barker sits atop the dais. Why is it important? It's important because of many of the facts that we heard from members on both sides of this place in relation to this debate. It's important, because how often do you hear in this place in the policy debate or otherwise the need for us to see we convert more of our raw product to value added product? How often do we hear debates about needing to push the value chain further down the road? As someone who represents, as I said, more employees engaged in manufacturing per head of population than any other person in this place, I also represent a whole swathe of farmers, foresters and fishermen who provide the raw product for those processing facilities and who benefit, quite frankly, because of those downstream processes. And it's probably not too far off to draw the conclusion that the fact that those manufacturing facilities exist in my electorate is because of the exceptional raw products that are grown, harvested, and in some cases fished but otherwise tended in my electorate. I recall an interview when I was first given the privilege of being in this role, when there was a theme around this building that manufacturing in Australia was dead. Deputy Speaker Freelander, you'll recall the decision from General Motors Holden to pull out of Australia, and that there was a sense that Australians couldn't manufacture anything anymore. This assertion was put to me by a local journalist on air, during a live broadcast, and I simply said: 'That's rubbish. Here in the electorate'—because I was being interviewed in the electorate—'manufacturing is thriving.' 'How could that be?' said the reporter. Well, I ran the reporter through the facts. Of course, this was in the lead-up to establishing world-leading free trade agreements with a number of significant export destinations, and we've only gone from strength to strength. Our government has also identified the need, if you like, to lean into modern manufacturing. In October 2020, the Prime Minister announced the Modern Manufacturing Strategy, to build national resilience by securing sovereign capabilities in areas of national interest. Whether it's Philly cheese, all of which is produced in Mount Gambier in my electorate; or the meat that comes from Teys abattoir at Naracoorte; or the wines—I know the member for Cowper was making contributions about wines from other states outside of South Australia; I acknowledge his enthusiasm but, quite frankly, he's fighting an uphill battle!—throughout the Barossa and Coonawarra. There are other modern manufacturing plants, like Costa Adelaide Mushrooms in Murray Bridge, a facility which looks very much like it has come off the set of a sci-fi movie. Modern manufacturing is not, as many in this place would suggest, something that doesn't take place in regional Australia. I want to take a moment to dwell on the Manufacturing Modernisation Fund. It's obviously a fund of great importance. It's part of our government's strategy to lean into modern manufacturing and take advantage of the very real opportunities that exist, not exclusively but assisted, of course, by the free-trade agenda that we've been able to negotiate so successfully across the globe in our time in government since 2013. That modern manufacturing fund has seen a number of projects supported in Barker. Those projects include both the very big and the very small, but I want to talk today about two projects at opposite ends of that spectrum: respectfully, a smaller project supporting a more modest but important manufacturing exercise and a potentially gargantuan one. These projects highlight the breadth of manufacturing that takes place in my electorate, and also the importance of manufacturing across that spectrum, from the very small to the very large. I've never had one, but espresso martinis, apparently, are pretty trendy! Now, in order to have one, or at least produce one, you need a shot of coffee. In a busy bar environment, spending time firing up the coffee machine, producing your shot of coffee, cooling it down and then producing the espresso martini is a less than efficient way of going about it. So Arrosto Coffee, in my electorate of Barker, got thinking. What they did was establish a rather small bespoke but, I would suggest, relatively inefficient manufacturing process which allowed cold-drip coffee to be bottled and then sold so that, in making that espresso martini, the bar could quickly access a shot of coffee, execute the espresso martini and get to the next customer. In a hospitality environment like that one of the most significant inputs is labour costs, so this was a significant saving. Along comes the modern manufacturing fund. A $99,550 grant went to Arrosto Coffee to go towards what was effectively a $200,000 project. The grant allowed the business to build a new manufacturing facility, complete with upgrades to bottling, labelling, sterilising technologies and a renewable energy system. I took the opportunity recently, when I was in Renmark, to pop in, and in a happy coincidence they were commissioning a bottling line while I was there. I saw what a significant transformation a modest but meaningful contribution can make. For the benefit of the minister at the table, the Minister for Resources and Water, this is a business that exists in the Murray-Darling Basin, and though it wasn't receiving funding from the Murray-Darling Basin Regional Economic Diversification Program, it is a great example of a business diversifying away from reliance on irrigated horticulture. That is what the modern manufacturing fund can do at the more modest end of the industry spectrum. I now take the House to the other end of the spectrum. Serendipitously, today I signed a letter of support in relation to the next round of the Australian government's Modern Manufacturing Initiative. It was to support an application proposed by Borg Manufacturing. As I am co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Forestry Industries, this is a project that has had my interest for some time. Borg is seeking funding to support the development of a fully integrated, world-class recycled-wood particle board manufacturing facility, incorporating highly efficient heat-recovery systems. In short, Borg is seeking to take wood waste from construction sites and reuse it by making it into particle board, which will find its way back onto construction sites and into the construction of dwellings and other things. It's significant because, though the House might not appreciate it, one of the largest streams of waste going to landfill today by volume is building waste. If we can remove wood fibre from that stream and re-energise that wood fibre together with new fibres into brand new particle board, it will be a significant win. It's a significant win for industry because we're talking about a capital project of some $150 million. You can only imagine how many jobs in construction that will create at Borg's facility in Mount Gambier. It's also a win for the national interest. When I began my contribution, I spoke about the fact that our government is leaning in to the Modern Manufacturing Strategy around securing sovereign capability. It might come as a surprise to the House, but we operate a trade deficit in this country when it relates to timber and wood products. Australia is a net importer of timber. I can't fathom it, but it's real. We import timber to a value of around $6 billion, while we export timber and timber products to the value of about $4 billion. A significant element of that is particleboard. This project alone, using the latest generation technology, will produce over 40 per cent of the nation's particleboard demand. It will be a domestic processing facility for pulp log, which today effectively has no domestic processing home in Australia. Indeed, we're even struggling to export that product internationally. The very real risk is that, if we don't establish processing facilities like this one proposed by Borg in the south-east of South Australia, then much of the pulp log in this country will simply go to waste; it will be thinned to waste. This is valuable fibre that takes many years to grow. It will be thinned to produce more structural timber as part of the plantation growing sector. We as the government are leaning in on modern manufacturing. Too often in this place, when people hear those words or that phrase in the context of innovation and other issues that are critically important, they fail to appreciate that manufacturing exists on a spectrum. In my electorate, in my very real examples, I've shown you the importance of both very small projects and the gargantuan $100 to $200 million projects. They're important not for any other reason than that they drive employment outcomes. It's employment outcomes that drive strong families, and strong families that make strong communities. All of that can be derived directly from a commitment by our government to lean into modern manufacturing to secure our sovereign capability in areas of national interest. 17:37 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes Thank you, Deputy Speaker Freelander. I'm pleased that you're in the chair while I make a contribution to this debate. Firstly, I'd note for anyone watching a recording of this, that I'm speaking in the Australian federal parliament, and my speech here is protected by the Parliamentary Privileges Act, which goes back to the UK Bill of Rights 1688. I have free speech to say what I'm about to say. It should not be impeached or questioned outside of this parliament, for to do so is a breach of our Parliamentary Privileges Act. In relation to the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill, I note that the member for Chifley has moved an amendment, and that is: That all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: 'whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes the jobs and economic growth generated from a robust innovation ecosystem; and (2) condemns the Coalition Government for its continual failure to back Australian industry and innovation, particularly to deal with challenges arising from the pandemic.' I rise in support of the member for Chifley's bill. I note in his comments he also says that Australia is home to many incredible companies and firms, but our innovative ideas languish with one of the lowest start-up formation rates in the world. We've got to be more ambitious. We've got to commit ourselves to bringing more great Australian ideas to the global market. I'd like to give an example of that and also give an example of why I support the member for Chifley's amendment. In April last year, Monash University conducted a study which they have published the results of. I'd like to quote directly from Monash University's press release: A collaborative study led by the Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute (BDI) with the Peter Doherty Institute of Infection and Immunity (Doherty Institute), a joint venture of the University of Melbourne and Royal Melbourne Hospital, has shown that an anti-parasitic drug already available around the world kills the virus within 48 hours. The Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute's Dr Kylie Wagstaff, who led the study, said the scientists showed that the drug, Ivermectin, stopped the SARS-CoV-2 virus growing in cell culture within 48 hours. "We found that even a single dose could essentially remove all viral RNA by 48 hours and that even at 24 hours there was a really significant reduction in it," Dr Wagstaff said. She continued: Ivermectin is very widely used and seen as a safe drug. We need to figure out now whether the dosage you can use it at in humans will be effective—that's the next step … Of course I'm sure that you, Mr Deputy Speaker Freelander, more than anyone knows that something being tested in vitro, in a test tube, is a long, long way from showing effectiveness in humans. After the discovery of Australia's Dr Wagstaff, Australia's internationally renowned Professor Borody, a physician with four— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 You've got to be kidding me! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 The member for Fenner on a point of order. Mr Craig Kelly 99931 You've seriously got to be kidding me! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! Dr Leigh BU8 Deputy Speaker, it is essential to the dignity of the House that we debate the matters before us. The second reading amendment is narrow in its focus on the industry aspects of the pandemic. It doesn't allow the member to speak about ivermectin, a drug which the Therapeutic Goods Administration has asked Australians not to use and has suggested not be imported for the purposes of dealing with COVID. Questions such as these are clearly outside the issues that are before the House. The member has many other opportunities to raise questions such as this. He might make a 90-second statement, he might speak in the adjournment— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! I think the appropriate action is to request that the member be relevant. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 On the relevance rule, let's be very clear what this amendment says. It says: … condemns the Coalition Government for its continual failure to back Australian industry and innovation, particularly to deal with challenges arising from the pandemic … That is exactly what I am speaking about. You come into this chamber and want to silence debate on one of the most important issues ever to face our country. Shame on you down there at the desk, Member for Fenner or wherever you're from! It is absolutely crystal clear that what I am debating is directly relevant to this bill. How dare you stand up and try to silence debate in the House because of some ideological view that you may have! I am directly talking about the government's continued failure to back Australian industry and innovation and I am talking about an Australian innovation that we have let slip through our fingers. That's what I have been talking about, which is directly 100 per cent relevant to this bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! The member for Fenner on a point of order. Dr Leigh BU8 I raise a point of order, Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 What is the point of order? Dr Leigh BU8 Relevance. The question here is not the efficacy of ivermectin, which Anthony Fauci has warned against and the Therapeutic Goods Administration has warned against; it is the member's need to be relevant to matters before the House. He can debate this in other forums. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I remind the honourable member he is still bound by the rules of the parliament. We are not having a debate. Mr Pitt 148150 That was the point I was about to make. Far be it from me to get involved; however, a point of order on relevance has already been made and, of course, you can't debate at the box; it's simply to make the point. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I would remind the member to please be relevant. You're not here to grandstand; you're here to deliver a speech about a bill. Thank you. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Consistent with your ruling, I will continue to talk about Australian innovation, and with that, under the rules of this House, I'm absolutely 100 per cent entitled to cite an example, and that is what I am doing, Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You have cited an example and now it's now time to move on. Thank you. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 I firstly cited the example—I started, before I was interrupted—of Dr Kylie Wagstaff from Monash University, who discovered that ivermectin kills COVID stone cold dead in a test tube. I then went on to talk about Australia's research and innovation with Australia's Professor Tom Borody, someone with experience in innovation and research, an internationally regarded physician with four FDA approved drugs on the US and Australian markets, who is famous for developing the triple therapy that cured peptic ulcers, saving more than 18,000 lives just in Australia and millions internationally. Professor Borody understands about innovation. He understands about what it is to work in Australian industry and develop an idea and take it through to the marketplace. That is exactly what we are talking about. Now, what did Professor Borody say following Dr Wagstaff's discoveries? He said that the combination of three approved off-the-shelf drugs could be the answer to Australia's COVID crisis. He said—and I quote directly: If nothing else, make it available in aged care homes immediately. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! I remind the member to be relevant. This has no relevance to the bill at hand. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 With the greatest respect, Deputy Speaker, this bill is called the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021. There is an amendment before the House and that amendment 'condemns the coalition government for its continued failure to back Australian industry innovation, particularly to deal with the challenges arising from the pandemic,' and that is precisely what I'm talking about. I'm talking precisely about the amendment and I'm precisely giving an example of what the amendment moved by the opposition talks about. So I will continue. Professor Borody said: If nothing else, make it available in aged care homes immediately. Our elderly are at the highest risk and this is a very safe— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! A point of order, Member for Fenner? Dr Leigh BU8 Deputy Speaker, the question is not about Professor Borody's views, which have been repudiated by the Royal Australian College of GPs. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 You are debating the issue— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 What's the point of order? Dr Leigh BU8 It is about the member's ability to be relevant to the bill at hand. And, if he cannot be relevant— Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 You cannot. Dr Leigh BU8 you should sit him down. If he continues to defy your ruling, you should sit him down. He has other channels of this parliament in which he can pursue these issues. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! I will allow the member to continue, but I do remind him to be relevant. I do have the ability to stop him from speaking. I don't want to do that—I make that quite clear. I respect your rights to express your opinion, but you must stay relevant to the bill, and continuing on this subject I don't consider to be relevant. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 I appreciate your ruling, Deputy Speaker. I will continue to be relevant to the amendment that is before the House, and I will state that amendment again. The amendment moved by the opposition 'condemns the coalition government for its continual failure to back Australian industry and innovation', and I am talking about Australian innovation. I'm giving an example of Australian innovation. The amendment further says, 'particularly to deal with challenges arising from the pandemic'. The words I am saying could not be more relevant to the amendment. I'll continue from where I was interrupted. Professor Borody said, when he was talking about innovation and how he was trying to innovate here in Australia—which is exactly what we are debating here: Also, our frontline workers deserve more protection with a preventative medication like this, and as an emergency treatment if they test positive. An ivermectin tablet can cost as little as $2—which could make it by far the cheapest, safest, and fastest cure for Australians and the Australian economy. How have we missed the boat? This was a wonderful opportunity to showcase Australian innovation. This could have been known as the Australian treatment around the world. Just have a look at some of the success it has had around the world. We've all seen the stories out of India, of how terribly COVID has affected India. The state of Uttar Pradesh has a population of 230 million. The chief minister, Yogi Adityanath— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 A point of order, again? Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 This is beyond a joke! The interruptions are beyond a joke! This is a deliberate attempt to silence a debate. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! Let me hear the member for Fenner. I believe he has a point of order. Dr Leigh BU8 I do, on relevance. This is not a question of ivermectin, which the Centre for Disease Control has warned against and the Australian Department of Health has warned against; it is the member's ability to be relevant the bill. If he can't do that, you should sit him down. You ask him these things but he doesn't change his behaviour at all. Mr Pitt 148150 As the honourable member would know, he's not able to debate at the box on a point of order—just to make the point of order. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I don't think there is room for debate about the issues that the member for Hughes is raising. He's entitled to put his point of view. He's as relevant as I suspect he is going to be. I'd like him to continue. Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 In the 40 seconds I have left, I will try and wrap up. It was the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh that looked at Australian innovation and industry, and took notice of Professor Borody. And what did they do? From having a daily case rate of 35,000, by using Borody's ivermectin treatment—an innovation discovered in Australia—they have their seven-day case average down to 19 and their seven-day death average down to just two people, with six to seven per cent vaccinated. This is a disgrace. The conduct of the member at the desk during this debate— (Time expired) 17:53 Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Dawson I was actually quite interested in the points the member for Hughes was raising there. We're here talking about the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021, which relates to industry research and development, relates to manufacturing and relates to the establishment of this new brand new entity, Industry, Innovation and Science Australia, which will be looking at a range of different industries and assisting people to manufacture things, including breakthrough drugs—that's very exciting. This is why the government is putting this forward, so we can see breakthrough drugs such as ivermectin come to fruition. Perhaps when all the studies are shown and the scare campaigns are not launched against those studies and the claims, we will have an industry that we can be proud of in this country that's going to save lives through a treatment such as ivermectin. I note that that great hub of science and innovation—again, things we're talking about here today—at Monash University, the Biomedicine Discovery Institute, is doing work that will probably lead to manufacturing that will fit squarely under the policy of the Morrison government in promoting the development of a strategic manufacturing industry here in Australia. Of course drugs which could potentially be a treatment for COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 would be front and centre for that, I would have thought. So it's really good to know that the Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute actually found that in vitro—as the member for Hughes said—ivermectin stopped the SARS-CoV-2 virus from growing in cell culture within 48 hours. That's great news for innovation and industry in this country, when we— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! The member for Fenner, on a point of order? Dr Leigh BU8 Yes, a point of order, on relevance. The member is meant to be part of a government whose Department of Health has called against the use of ivermectin and yet he's raising it inappropriately and irrelevantly in this debate. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I will remind the member for Dawson, likewise: I'm quite happy to hear you speak but you must be relevant to the bill. Ivermectin is a drug that's well known to me and it's not an innovative drug. I don't want to give you a lecture about the differences between in vitro and in vivo but please stay relevant to the bill. I would also like to say that, as far as I'm aware, Professor Borody has never treated a patient with SARS-CoV-2. Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Thank you for that, Deputy Speaker. I hear what you've had to say there. The member for Hughes referred to Professor Borody. I am referring to the Monash biomedicine Discovery Institute and Dr Kylie Wagstaff. They're doing important work. Obviously, that important work could lead to potential future manufacturing of the drug. The innovation would be that drug, ivermectin, being used in a new fashion to treat a new virus; I really look forward to that. So I thank the member for Hughes for bringing that up here. I am astonished as to why people would want to silence that. It's not the member for Hughes talking about the 48 hours that it took for it to destroy those cells but it's Monash University and their Biomedicine Discovery Institute. So more power to them and I hope they go on to manufacture—or at least to be part of the great manufacturing story of this nation—what might potentially be a wonder drug. I notice that the current study they have is in peer review. We'll wait and see what that comes out and says, but it seems very promising. We want to grow our manufacturing sector with these new drugs, usage of drugs that are coming onto the market and a whole heap of other activities. I want to talk about some of the activities in my electorate—the Mackay region, in particular. The Mackay region takes up probably two-thirds of the electorate of Dawson. There is Mackay itself, of course, the Whitsundays and Bowen, and then we go into the electorate of Capricornia, where we have Collinsville and the coalfields. But my electorate is the service hub for the Bowen and Galilee basins. The Galilee Basin, of course, is also something that the opposite side didn't want talked about some time ago so I might get shut down for that as well. Mackay was identified by another thing that the opposition don't like talking about—the Adani Group—as being the key service centre for its $21 billion coalmine project in the Galilee Basin. There are estimates that for every one manufacturing job that's created we create another three jobs in other areas of the economy. So Adani making Mackay the service hub for their mine, the Carmichael mine—and Adani is now actually called Bravus, so I should refer to it by its new name—has led to more manufacturing for the resources industry in our region and to more manufacturing jobs, organically. But we are helping, and we've already helped, as the Morrison government. In June this year I was very pleased to announce to CQ Field Mining Services, a Mackay based mining service business, that they were one of 86 across the country to receive funding under the second round of the Morrison government's Manufacturing Modernisation Fund. That fund is designed to help businesses modernise their manufacturing processes and, because of that, it improves productivity, it reduces costs and it enables them to target new export opportunities and create highly skilled manufacturing. That, indeed, is what the core of the bill before us is all about. It's all about how we can do more through our Modern Manufacturing Initiative to assist industries. The Manufacturing Modernisation Fund is a critical part of that. CQ Field Mining Services is a maintenance and construction contractor. They will be investing in transforming their METS—mining equipment, technology and services—operations with the funding that they've received. There are many other innovative manufacturing projects across my region that are as exciting as the work being done at Monash University on ivermectin and its other potential applications. I think it's important to remember that ivermectin research that's being done is going to be groundbreaking and could lead to more manufacturing and more manufacturing jobs. Back in Mackay— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 The member for Fenner, a point of order? Dr Leigh BU8 On relevance, Deputy Speaker. The second reading amendment clearly goes to manufacturing. As the member well knows, the research on ivermectin is at very early stages, which is why the Department of Health and the Therapeutic Goods Administration do not recommend it as a treatment, in line with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Dr Anthony Fauci. Mr Craig Kelly 99931 On the point of order raised by the member for Fenner: there is no point of order and the member for Fenner is actually deliberately and intentionally trying to interrupt the proceedings of this parliament. The member for Fenner should be censured for his conduct. This is a special responsibility in this parliament, not to interrupt others in the way he's— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Order! We are not having a debate, the member for Fenner and the member for Hughes. I think that the point of order on relevance is sustained and I'd ask the member for Dawson to be relevant. But I would like him to continue his contribution. Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 Thank you very much. It's amazing that you can say just one word and get a reaction like that. I'll try not to use it again for the member for Fenner, although it might just slip in— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 I thank the member for Dawson for that. It would be very good if we could get through this debate; I'd appreciate it. Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 I'm finding it highly amusing to carry on. What's not amusing, what's actually invigorating, is the potential in the Mackay region for new manufacturing and new industry. We have a Mackay alternative sugarcane processing facility that's currently an idea in germination. It's actually more than an idea, as a substantial business case that was done finds that it stacks up, and this is really innovative stuff. It's never been done, not just in Australia but in the world. It could take our sugarcane industry from where it is, which basically has about three, maybe four products that are used in the main—the raw crystal, the molasses, the gas, the ethanol—and the co-generation is another product that comes out of sugar at the moment, and take it to a variety of different streams of income for farmers and millers alike. That's the kind of innovation we need, that's the kind of innovation that IISA is going to be looking at and looking after and it's the kind of innovation that we are currently trying to crack open with our Modern Manufacturing Initiative. More than that, up in Brandon, in the northern part of my electorate, there is a rice mill. Not many people know about it, but it's actually owned by a little company called SunRice. SunRice are hoping that they can expand that facility and make North Queensland the new centre of operations, eventually equal to what we have in New South Wales. That is great innovation that, if we can crack it open and get more manufacturing into the region, is going to be very important. In Bowen as well, talking about innovation, we've literally got a rocket company, Gilmour Space Technologies, which has identified Abbot Point as a prime site for satellite launch capability. I've been working with them and the relevant ministers to try to facilitate this. It's something that is going to go off—literally! I look forward to the day when we launch our rockets from the Whitsundays. It would boost Australia's capability. We don't have a great deal of launch capability in this country. That is a strategic need. I'm sure that IISA is going to be facilitating and assisting in these endeavours as well. One thing I'm proud as punch about is that, in my electorate, there is an agave distillery project. We can't call it tequila, because Mexico has the brand on that, and I don't like talking too much about tequila because of bad, bad memories from many decades ago! An honourable member interjecting— Mr CHRISTENSEN 230485 You probably couldn't call relevance because most of it I can't remember to be relevant! This agave facility is looking for Modern Manufacturing Initiative funding as well. I'm sure this is going to be the kind of thing the government is going to want to promote with manufacturing. It's all about food and beverage manufacturing, but this is really niche stuff that could pay off big time and could lead to a whole heap of jobs. I certainly wouldn't be touting the health benefits of agave, but Top Shelf International reckons they've got 450,000 blue agave plants. They're hoping to reach one million plants in the ground in North Queensland by 2024, and that's going to produce a lot of spirits to go right around the world. I've been invited to taste a prototype of the product—a member's got to do what a member's got to do! I'll gladly report back to the House on how good top-shelf agave spirit is once I'm able to get back to my electorate. But all of these products and projects—whether it is pursuing an agave distillery in the Whitsundays, space launches out of Bowen, rice production in Brandon, a new methodology of processing sugarcane that can produce wholly new items in Mackay or, indeed, pursuing different and innovative uses for ivermectin—are critical to Australia's future manufacturing capabilities. That's what this initiative is all about. I really hope the IISA looks at all of these projects and helps facilitate them to go further, because they are going to be instrumental in creating the jobs of the future, the ones in my electorate. It's all going to be about jobs in the regions, and that is vitally important. I commend all of those projects and I commend the bill. Go, manufacturing! 18:08 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm I rise to speak on the Industry Research and Development Amendment (Industry Innovation and Science Australia) Bill 2021. This bill repurposes the advisory body known as Innovation and Science Australia to form Industry Innovation and Science Australia, or IISA. But this isn't just a name change. It's part of a broader reform to IISA to clarify its focus on Australian industry innovation. Innovation and Science Australia was conceived and announced by the coalition government under the National Innovation and Science Agenda in 2015 and formally established in 2016 to fill a need for a new dedicated and high-profile body to advise the government on innovation, science and research matters. The body has made an important contribution to furthering Australia's innovation and science capabilities and has helped inform the government's investment to enhance in these areas, but now it is time for a step-up. The inclusion of 'industry' in IISA's name is an important signal to stakeholders in both the private and public sectors. It acknowledges the critical role that innovation and science play in enabling competitive Australian industries and driving a productive, resilient and prosperous economy. It highlights the Morrison government's commitment to seeking the best expert advice on these matters, to supporting genuine and practical innovation in Australian priority sectors and to ensuring sovereign capability and industry resilience, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and a need for quick and robust economic recovery. The Morrison government's investments in innovation, science and technology are growing Australia's competitive advantage, lifting our economic resilience and enhancing the quality of life of all Australians. Importantly, these investments are backing in our businesses and the 860,000 Australians who work in the manufacturing sector. Our businesses and industries stepped up to the recent challenges they have faced in innovative and genuine ways, often harnessing technology to drive profitability, grow their businesses, and not just keep people employed but create more jobs. This accelerated use of science and technology has not only helped our businesses stay afloat but also created opportunities for them to be more connected and more resilient to future shocks. That's why, in the 2020-21 budget handed down in October last year, we made a record investment of $11.9 billion in the science, research and innovation system. That is hundreds of millions of dollars of investment more than when Labor was last in office. Our investment is used to underpin a strong research and intellectual capital base, support the commercialisation of good ideas, maintain Australia's comparative and competitive advantages, ensure our national and sovereign needs are met and guarantee we have the human capital and physical infrastructure necessary to seize the opportunities of the future. As the government's strategic advisory body on industry innovation, IISA is playing a pivotal role in guiding and advocating government policies and programs to drive economic recovery and growth, and in particular the Modern Manufacturing Strategy. By playing to our strengths and strategically investing in harnessing our world-class science and research, we can build our national resilience into a stronger economy and take more of our quality products to the world. This strategy is already building confidence and having an impact. The Australian Industry Group's April Australian Performance of Manufacturing Index saw an increase of 1.8 points, to 61.7 points, which is the highest monthly result since March 2018. I have seen this impact firsthand in my own electorate of Chisholm. Local Box Hill business Atmo Biosciences is doing incredible work helping to unlock the mysteries of the human gut and improve diagnosis and treatment for common gastrointestinal disorders. The Morrison government is backing Atmo with significant support delivered through the modern manufacturing fund, as part of the Modern Manufacturing Strategy, to help them to improve their manufacturing processes and scale up their business. The Modern Manufacturing Strategy is at the forefront of the government's economic recovery efforts. It is a whole-of-government strategy to help Australian manufacturing scale up, become more competitive and resilient, and create jobs for current and future generations. Repurposing Innovation and Science Australia to Industry Innovation and Science Australia makes a simple but significant step in the implementing of these transformational policies. 18:15 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck This bill is a strategic step for clarifying the government's expert advisory architecture on industry and innovation. The repositioning of ISA to Industry Innovation and Science Australia, IISA, acknowledges the pivotal role that the private sector industries have in guiding and advocating for government policies and programs that effectively drive economic recovery and growth. This legislation supports the government's commitment to seeking the best expert advice on these matters, to supporting genuine and practical innovation in priority industry areas in Australia and to ensuring sovereign capability and industry resilience. I commend the bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 The question is that this bill now be read a second time. To this the honourable member for Chifley has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The question now is that the amendment be disagreed to. Question agreed to. Original question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 87 18:17 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. BUSINESS 87 BUSINESS Rearrangement 87 18:18 Mr WYATT M3A Hasluck I move: That business intervening before order of the day No. 9, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day. Question agreed to. BILLS 87 BILLS Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021 87

Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021

Second Reading 87 18:19 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair [by video link] I'm pleased to speak on the Defence Legislation (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021. At the outset, I say Labor will be supporting the legislation in the House today. The bill is aimed at reforming the system of military discipline for those who serve in the Australian Defence Force by improving the way discipline officers and summary authorities operate under the current legislation, the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982. To defend Australia and our national interest, we must maintain a Defence Force that demonstrates high levels of professionalism, competence, commitment and discipline. On this, Labor agrees with the government. The women and men who join the Australian Defence Force are subject to military law, in addition to civilian law, which has its own discipline system and capacity to impose punishments and orders under the Defence Force Discipline Act. The act provides a comprehensive system of military discipline that must be trusted by the Australian people and, most importantly, by those who serve in the ADF. And it must be trusted to be applied fairly and effectively in all circumstances. The system of discipline administered by the ADF must encourage the men and women of the ADF to be accountable for their actions, and, importantly, to learn and grow from any mistakes made. As the people in our Defence Force work and live with one another, and within teams, they have a reasonable expectation that any wrongdoing or breach of discipline will be dealt with quickly and fairly. Failure to do so would put the lives of others at risk, it erodes morale and it adversely impacts unit cohesion and fighting capability. Military service and the need to maintain discipline places constraints and responsibilities on the people of our Defence Force. These challenges are unique and experienced by few others of their fellow Australians. A separate system on military discipline is therefore essential to enable the Defence Force to deal with matters that relate directly to discipline, morale and operational capability. It's in this context of a disciplined fighting force that, in some cases, breaches of military discipline by people in our Defence Force are dealt with more severely than would otherwise be the case if civilians engaged in similar conduct. The military discipline system operates in Australia and overseas in all times and in all circumstances. Enforcing military discipline is essential at all times, both in training for operations and during conflict in often difficult and dangerous circumstances. Those in the ADF are legally bound to follow up all lawful commands, including orders that involve considerable risk to their own lives and the lives of others, or may require them to use lethal force against an enemy. The military discipline system administered under the Defence Force Discipline Act has three tiers, and it's important that I outline what they are. At the lowest level is the disciplinary infringement scheme, which enables minor breaches of discipline to be dealt with by the issuing of an infringement notice. A person can admit the breach of discipline—in other words, basically plead guilty—and be dealt with by a discipline officer, who may impose a low-level punishment, such as a fine or a reprimand. It has some similarities with the public understanding of what a very minor traffic offence would be: you accept the ticket and pay the fine, or you can choose to contest the matter in court. At least 80 per cent of all matters are dealt with in this way, with the person accepting and agreeing with the infringement and copping the penalty. The second tier is the summary system. This comprises of subordinate summary authorities, commanding officers and superior summary authorities. These proceedings are adversarial in nature, with criminal law-like procedures in the disciplinary infringement scheme, and are not administered by legally trained personnel. It is this tier that is being collapsed and done away with by this bill. At the highest level are the superior tribunals. These comprise of Defence Force magistrates who strictly deal with court martials, which deal with more serious matters and apply criminal law proceedings—for example, if you were being charged with common assault. As early as 1989, the Defence Force Discipline Legislation board of review, chaired by the Hon. Xavier Connor AO, QC, reviewed the operation of the newly enacted Defence Force Discipline Act on behalf of parliament. He observed: 'For the most part, service discipline, particularly as administered by summary authorities, has to do with matters which do not contain any element of criminality and which would not constitute an "offence" under civil law. Many of them are of quite a minor nature and probably in more than 90 per cent of these the facts are not in dispute.' These matters referred to by the review board range from actions such as those relating to operations against an enemy force, not attending duty on time, the unauthorised discharge of a weapon and having dirty boots on parade. Discipline lies at the heart of the service in any defence force. In 2005 a Senate committee commented on changes within the Australian Defence Force military discipline scheme and noted: Military command is in many ways defined by obedience and conformity. Discipline is, along with leadership, a crucial underpinning of command. In fact, it was the then Labor opposition that initiated this inquiry to deal with evidence from the ADF and their families about military justice systems. The broader context of this bill is important, because the Australian Defence Force commanders have a duty of care to all people under their command whether at home in Australia or deployed overseas. And the priorities are not just about maintaining discipline; equally important is the welfare of those sailors, soldiers and aviators who serve in the ADF. By simplifying the discipline procedures, the time required to resolve commonly occurring minor breaches of military discipline could be significantly reduced. This would ease the stress on all those involved in any disciplinary action process. There was a 2017 review, directed by the Chief of Defence Force, which found some aspects of the current system, which is being amended by this bill, were, indeed, overly complex and difficult to use. The review found in particular that summary discipline matters were often taking too long to resolve and adversely impacting the person accused of wrongdoing. Details in these matters were often complex, but there were delays in resolving breaches of military discipline which affected morale and the potential safety of other people, the review found. Many senior non-commissioned officers and junior officers were reluctant to use the scheme—that is, the adversarial scheme, the summary authority scheme. There was a lack of confidence in applying and understanding the complex court-like requirements of these adversarial summary proceedings. In consequence, the use of the summary discipline system was in constant and consistent decline. The review concluded the operation of the summary discipline system had proved problematic in recent conflicts, that the nature of modern warfare had changed since 1985 and that the Defence Force had been deployed in smaller Australian formations, often with independent units or embedded with allies frequently far from administrative support, which would allow the kind of adversarial-style summary authority systems to operate. The review found the complexities of the summary discipline system, particularly given the frequency, nature and length of overseas operations, often resulted in unacceptable delays in resolving or finalising breaches of military discipline. Given this feedback, Labor understands why the government has brought this on, but we can't understand why it's taken them four years if they think it's necessary. Under the bill, we note, more serious offending would continue to be dealt with by a superior military tribunal or referred to civilian authorities as appropriate, and Labor thinks that is appropriate. The bill reforms the discipline system in three ways, and it's important that I outline what they are. Schedule 1 will expand the operation of the highly regarded and effective disciplinary infringement scheme. The changes will allow a range of minor breaches of discipline to be dealt with more quickly and fairly with less formality within the disciplinary infringement scheme rather than more complex and adversarial service tribunal processes. Defence thinks this means that about 90 per cent of matters will be dealt with in this way. This will introduce a new senior discipline officer position, creating a new two-tiered discipline infringement scheme. We note the bill preserves the right of anyone facing a disciplinary infringement to make an informed decision whether to choose to have their matter dealt with under a disciplinary infringement scheme and appear before a discipline officer or a senior discipline officer in a non-adversarial process. Schedule 2 would modernise the discipline system structure and reduce its complexity by removing the subordinate summary authority, and realigns the rank and the punishment jurisdiction of summary authorities, ensuring the logical progression in terms of the rank of the accused person, the seriousness of the breach of military discipline, the level of punishment that may be imposed and the seniority of the summary authority. Schedule 3 further reforms the military discipline scheme and introduces some new service offences which modernise, and I think are good outcomes. These relate to cyberbullying, the receipt of a benefit or allowance and the failure to perform a duty or activity. Cyberbullying conduct is corrosive to discipline not just in military life but also in a civilian workplace. It can have an adverse impact on the mental wellbeing of its victims. The new cyberbullying service offence would send a very strong message to those in the ADF that the use of social media to cyberbully another person is unacceptable and will not be tolerated in the ADF. The intention of this new service offence is to enable Defence to protect victims of cyberbullying through early intervention and put a stop to the cyberbullying behaviour before it gets out of hand. It will protect people who choose to serve in the ADF. Current safeguards for people accused of breaching military discipline will remain. Crucially, under the disciplinary infringement scheme, a person must choose to be dealt with by a discipline officer or a senior discipline officer. Labor acknowledges there are some additional safeguards in the bill, such as the requirement for any reasonable excuse to be considered before issuing a disciplinary infringement notice and the ability of a discipline officer or a senior discipline officer to dismiss an infringement if the officer considers the person has a reasonable excuse for committing the infringement. Punishments imposed by a senior discipline officer must be reviewed by a commanding officer—a review process. Labor thinks that's a good idea. On review, a commanding officer will have the power to confirm a punishment decision, substitute a punishment decision with a reduced punishment or no punishment or decide that the discipline infringement be dismissed with no punishment imposed. It's not clear to us whether the changes are strictly necessary, and there has been little or no consultation to date with legal experts or the wider defence community. The bill was introduced four years after the review. The question is why. At the same time, it's important to ensure we're getting right the balance between administrative efficiency and operational effectiveness on the one hand and fairness, the preservation of legal rights and access to justice for ADF personnel on the other hand. In particular, the minister has not provided a compelling explanation or concrete evidence of exactly how the amendments in the bill will enhance the ADF's operational effectiveness. In addition, Labor is concerned that, under the proposed changes, ADF members must choose to deal with an infringement scheme. The government expects, as I said, up to 90 per cent more matters will be dealt with this way. Further, the adversarial procedures, simplified rules of evidence and the Criminal Code 1995 provisions that apply to summary authority proceedings will not apply to the new disciplinary infringement scheme. Labor's view is that any changes should not remove rights and should be broadly consistent with what applies in the upper levels of military justice systems and civilian courts. Ultimately, Labor wants to ensure that military justice competently balances the following twin objectives. First, it must ensure that the ADF's operational needs for effective and efficient discipline are met. Second, it must uphold objective and independent standards of justice that the public has confidence in, protect the rights of ADF personnel and ensure their treatment. These are the principles that would guide an Albanese Labor government, and we would continue to look at the process of reform to ensure military justice is fair and effective. To that end, Labor has referred this bill to the Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for inquiry to ensure proper scrutiny and stakeholder consultation and to help clarify the consequences of these substantial amendments. We are not confident that the government has consulted wisely or widely on this bill. We will come to a final decision when the legislation is brought into the Senate and once we see the outcome of the inquiry. I encourage everyone who may be interested in this bill to make a submission to the Senate inquiry. In the meantime, we won't stand in the way of this bill in the House of Representatives. We won't oppose it. We believe that the vast majority of defence personnel serve and have served our country with distinction. We thank them for their service and we thank their families for giving their loved ones to the ADF to serve on behalf of our country and our community. The ADF personnel deserve a justice system that treats them fairly. We ask a lot of them, and we expect that the justice system that deals with them is a fair one, does not derogate from their rights, and makes sure that operational efficiency and mission effectiveness still operate so that our ADF personnel can do all that we ask of them. In these circumstances, Labor will not oppose this bill in the House of Representatives, and we commend it to the chamber. 18:35 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper I'm pleased to speak on the Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill. I would like to start by acknowledging all the current and former ADF personnel and thank you all for your service to this country. We would not have the freedoms we enjoy today without you and what you have done in the past. I was quite surprised when I was reading this bill that some of these issues had not been dealt with previously, in particular the streamlining of the judicial process. I was pleased to see that things such as cyberbullying will be addressed in the future. One very pleasing by-product of this legislation—and my friend the member for Reid knows all about this—is improved mental health. As a former defence lawyer, I sometimes became a little bit immune to my clients' feelings, including how they reacted to being accused of a charge or an offence. Even the slightest offence, which was dealt with by way of infringement notice, sometimes affected those people very heavily. Quite often those people were professional people who were going through tough times, who had made bad decisions or who had been falsely accused. The weight on their shoulders for long periods of time whilst they waited for their matter to be dealt with through the judicial process affected their mental health and their way of life for many, many months and, at times, for more than two years. In relation to this amendment, a similar process was undertaken by the New South Wales Police Force almost 20 years ago, with minor offences dealt with by infringement. It was much to the furore of all the criminal lawyers, who thought they were going to lose work because people would plead guilty to the minor infringements and not receive criminal convictions or minor pecuniary impositions. What it did was streamline the system; it unclogged that backlog in the judicial process at the Local Court, the District Court and the Supreme Court. It worked exceptionally well. What it also did was give people an opportunity to accept responsibility without the stress or the delay and the expense of a Local Court hearing or a criminal trial at the District Court. I was a little bit surprised to see that it has taken the ADF this long to implement what has been running for at least 15 or 20 years throughout the police jurisdictions across Australia. And it is exactly what the ADF personnel deserve. The vast majority of ADF personnel are high-functio8ning professional people. When they're accused of something, whether they've done it or not, they deserve the ability to deal with it quickly, not to have it hanging over their head. I know, in certain circumstances in the past, some ADF personnel, because of the system, were on restricted duties for many, many months. Being on restricted duties, being unable to do what you trained for, weighs heavily on your mental health. If you're married, if you have a couple of kids, and you're on restricted duties, you don't receive that overtime or those bonuses that you might receive in a specialist squad, and so that transfers through that person accused to his or her family, to the children, to the way the house operates. So this amendment pleases me greatly. Knowing that that by-product—that by-product being the mental health of serving ADF personnel—is addressed is very, very pleasing. The act as it currently stands is complex in some areas and doesn't always delineate between severe and comparatively less serious infringements. There are two unfortunate side effects, as I've indicated. One is that minor breaches are dealt with by comparatively harsh penalties, which take a significant time to adjudicate and hand down. The second is that such infringements are potentially overlooked from an official capacity. Many senior noncommissioned officers and junior officers have reported having little confidence in the use of the summary disciplinary system because of its complexity. Its use has been in consistent decline, from 1,743 summary trials in 2009 to just 923 in 2019. Now, either we have fewer offences occurring—which is possible, due to the scrutiny—or those offences weren't being effectively dealt with by official means. It's critical that breaches of discipline are resolved quickly, fairly and proportionately not only to fortify good order and fighting capability but also to maintain overall morale and reduce the adverse effects that delays can have on mental health. I've referred to the fact that the nervous wait to hear a verdict can sometimes be worse than the punishment itself, and I've certainly seen that over and over in the past 30 years. We have to have appropriate disciplinary action to ensure that we maintain an operationally capable Defence Force with the highest level of competence. And we do—we do have the highest level of competence in the ADF, and I'm sure, if you asked anybody in the street, they would tell you that they have high confidence in what the ADF do. In order to remove these unnecessary administrative delays, the updated act will now have these three tiers, with progressively greater powers of punishment depending on the nature of the infringement. These tiers will allow authorities to identify the appropriate level of punishment more easily and effectively. Firstly, at the lowest level, is the disciplinary infringement scheme. This scheme enables minor breaches of discipline to be dealt with by the issuing of an infringement notice. Importantly, a disciplinary officer may impose a low-level punishment, such as a fine, extra duties, stoppage of leave or a reprimand, rather than a senior tribunal having to deal with it And that's one of the major points. You can imagine somebody who has made a mistake, who has done the wrong thing, being willing to effectively plead guilty just to get it out of the way, just to know 'I'm going to lose a week's leave or I'm going to be restricted in what I can do, but I'd rather it not be hanging over my head like the sword of Damocles', and deal with it appropriately. The second tier is the summary system, which is presided over by summary authorities. It's like the adversarial court system. Many minor infringements currently fall into this tier unnecessarily. I referred to the system in the New South Wales Police, where, by implementing that infringement process, the court effectively cleared a backlog of 18 months to two years. We heard submissions today that over 90 per cent of people who have received infringement notices effectively plead guilty to them, pay the fine or take the punishment. Of course, at the highest level, which must remain, superior tribunals comprising Defence Force magistrates, restricted and general courts martial will deal with serious matters which might result in dismissal from the ADF and punishment of imprisonment or reduction in rank. I do note that there are other offences that fall within the criminal jurisdiction; should a criminal offence take place, it is dealt with within the state or territory jurisdiction under that criminal jurisdiction in the district court or the Supreme Court. It's good to note that, with times changing, the changes will also deal with cyberbullying. Just because the men and women of the ADF are perceived to be rough, tough and able to handle anything, it doesn't mean that they're not also subject to cyberbullying. Unfortunately, in my opinion, social media is a cesspool. I don't believe that our society is better off with social media. We've seen the horrible, terrible circumstances of people who have taken their own lives because of cyberbullying. Sadly, the ADF—just like every other workplace—is no different. As MPs, we're in constant contact with our constituents via our own social media pages. We all know, on a daily basis, some of the comments in there that I'm sure that person—that keyboard warrior—wouldn't say to our faces. Whilst social media can be used as a good force in many ways, it also has that effect of harming mental health. It's pervasive most of the time, and you can't simply leave the room. So it's pleasing to see that this reform will enable authorities to hold to account those who would use social media for negative purposes against a colleague. Critically, it will allow early intervention; it's well documented that the longer these behaviours go on or persist that the more destructive they become in the future. So it's pleasing that these amendments have been made; I'm confident that they will make the ADF, the judicial process and simply the environment in the ADF a much better place. Making these small and, in some circumstances, well-overdue changes will definitely make it less administrative and will free up the system. There will be faster resolutions, and the changes will mean more certainty for offenders, resulting in less strain on their mental health—which is critically important, particularly in the ADF, where they are under enough stress as it is. And the bill will introduce reforms to the use of social media which, sadly, is an influence that we must look at managing specifically in terms of its short- and long-term effects and its misuse, which can be inflicted not only on individuals but on a serving unit. Again, I'm very pleased to commend these changes in the Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021 to the House. 18:49 Mr ROB MITCHELL M3E McEwen [by video link] I rise to join the shadow minister in cautiously welcoming the government's Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021. In doing so, I note the bill is aimed at reforming the system of military discipline for those who serve in our defence forces by changing the way discipline officers and summary authorities operate under the Defence Force Discipline Act. An important background to this bill is the 2017 review that found that aspects of the current system were overly complicated and difficult to apply in the context of today's Defence Force. Those familiar with that review will know it found, among other things, that summary discipline matters were taking way too long to resolve and were potentially having adverse impacts on the accused. Anyone who has served our country in uniform will know the big impact that those delays in resolving breaches of discipline have on morale and potentially on the safety of all concerned. It's certainly the case where people live, work and operate in close-knit communities in very stressful situations. Clearly the system has not been serving our defence personnel as well as it should, with many senior NCOs and junior officers simply being reluctant to use it. As a result, the use of summary discipline systems has been in pretty consistent decline over many years. This is particularly in the case of recent conflicts. Our defence personnel are now being deployed in smaller formations, often either as independent units or embedded with our allies, and more often than not are far away from administrative support. It's a far cry from when legislation was made law back in 1985. Taking those operational changes into account, it is important these reforms provide commanders and the men and women who serve under their command with a system of discipline that allows for minor breaches of discipline to be dealt with quickly, fairly and properly. It's also important to note that more serious offending should absolutely continue to be dealt with by a superior military tribunal or be referred to civilian authorities as appropriate. In terms of the bill itself, we know it is intended to reform the system in significant ways. It will expand on the operation of the highly regarded and effective disciplinary infringement scheme. It will allow a greater range of minor breaches of military discipline to be dealt with quickly, fairly and in less formality within the infringement scheme rather than by the more complex adversarial service tribunal process. When we talk about infractions, we're talking minor things—as the shadow minister rightly pointed out, things like dirty boots that don't require the need to have a full process on them. They should be handled properly, efficiently and quickly, and we should make sure the powers that be have all the tools they need to make the action swiftly and not cause more headaches and concerns for both the accused and the unit they're in. This bill will introduce a new senior discipline officer position, creating, in a sense, a two-tier disciplinary infringement scheme. Labor welcomes the additional safeguards included in the bill to ensure the scheme continues to operate fairly. Schedule 2 proposes to modernise the discipline system structure and reduces the complexity by removing the subordinate summary authority. Schedule 3 would further reform the military discipline system by introducing several new service offences. Importantly, these relate to cyberbullying, receipt of a benefit allowance and failure to perform a duty or activity. As we all know, and as the previous speaker mentioned, cyberbullying conduct is corrosive to discipline and can have severely adverse effects on the mental wellbeing of its victims. We know that back in 1985 there was no cyberbullying; it had never been heard of! But what we see today is a constant barrage of keyboard warriors who attack anonymously, hide behind bots and do these things that absolutely impact on people. It doesn't matter what walk of life you're from; we see this all the time. It's so important the men and women of our Defence Force who are doing the right thing are protected and looked after. I think the intention of this new offence enables Defence to protect victims of cyberbullying through early intervention and to put a stop to cyberbullying behaviour before it gets out of hand. The work I used to do with Bully Zero gave me absolute insight into what can happen with cyberbullying and the absolute dire consequences from that. The more that we can do to stop this, the better. We need to ensure that our defence personnel are given the protections they deserve and the security they deserve for the work they do for us. Importantly, current safeguards for persons accused of breaching military discipline rules still remain in this bill. So, looking at the bill as a whole, these proposed changes would appear to have a positive effect on improving the administration of discipline for all those who serve our country. But it is not clear whether these changes are strictly necessary. As we understand it, there has been little consultation to date. I think it's essential that we get the balance right between administrative efficiency on the one hand and fairness and the preservation of legal rights and access to justice for the members of our forces on the other. We need to ensure that people on the ground have a say and that there are no unintended consequences here. Quite often throughout this term and the last term of parliament we have seen that many bills have had to come back and be amended because of an unintended consequence. I think that is why it is important that we speak to defence personnel directly and get their feedback and their views. That's why Labor instigated a referral of the bill to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for a short inquiry. It's not to hold the bill up but to ensure there is proper scrutiny and proper stakeholder consultation. As the shadow minister said, Labor will not oppose the bill in the House, but we will moving a second reading amendment condemning the government's failures in defence and veterans affairs, and there are so many. But we will reserve our position on the bill until the Senate inquiry has reported back. It's only going to be a short time, but it can make a massive fundamental difference to the way this bill is presented and the way it delivers for our Defence Force personnel. I think the government should be supporting the idea of going out and consulting with people. Rather than run a top-down approach, they should actually start to listen to the people on the ground. With those few words, I wish the bill a speedy passage. I thank the House for its time. 18:56 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher Some of us are better at following orders than others. I was 19 years of age when I was given the DCM, the 'don't come Monday', when I was training to be a priest, because they didn't think that I'd be able to fulfil my vows of poverty, chastity and obedience. They were probably right, I guess, at the end of the day. In the civilian world, even in this place, not to follow rules can sometimes be an advantage. It can stimulate innovation, support independence and encourage enterprise. But, in a military setting, discipline and obedience are absolutely critical. They can be matters of life and death. To stay safe and do their job, every soldier, sailor and aviator has to know that their comrades around them will do exactly what they're required to every time. Without that knowledge and that certainty, coordinated action and resolve can break down, mistakes can be made, and people can be placed in serious danger. There is no space for rugged individualism in an effective combat unit. In the ADF, our serving men and women maintain order through a carefully structured disciplinary system which, since the 1980s, has consisted of three parts. The courts martial deal with the most serious offences, with legally trained officers acting as arbiters of fact and law. The summary authority system, with its three tiers, tackles less serious service offences following non-judicial but courtlike procedures. And the disciplinary infringement system maintains day-to-day order with respect to minor infringements whilst imposing modest punishments. I'm privileged in my roles in this place to have the opportunity to hear from many ADF personnel firsthand. As chair of the Defence Subcommittee of the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade; chair of the Coalition Policy Committee on Defence and Veterans Affairs; and an active member of the ADF Parliamentary Program, I get the privilege of speaking to soldiers, sailors and aviators on a regular basis. In this place, we talk about reforms and efficiencies and enhancing effectiveness. But many of our service men and women say it a little more plainly. When it comes to the military discipline system, ADF members say that the disciplinary infringement scheme is great and they say that the summary authority system as it stands is useless. Nobody likes it, so, guess what? They don't use it. I'm told that there has been more than a halving of cases coming before this tier of the discipline system since 2008. The Royal Australian Air Force, I understand, has largely avoided the process altogether. Members of the RAAF would probably have you believe that's because they never do anything wrong, but that's probably unlikely. When something doesn't work, our service men and women find a way. In this case they are voting with their feet and pushing matters to higher or lower authorities, depending on the seriousness of the case. Put simply, the summary authority system operates on court-like procedures, but it is conducted by ordinary officers without legal training and without much in the way of legal support. Its decisions are constantly subject to appeal to higher authorities. Officers tell me that, understandably, those operating in this court therefore approach it without much confidence and with an abundance of caution. There are reports of officers holding dress rehearsals of court proceedings to ensure no errors are made in procedure, while others read from the procedure manuals at great length during hearings to ensure every detail is present and correct. All of this is to avoid undermining the authority of officers and taking up even more time with a lengthy review process. Where a case has significant implications for a unit's discipline, or can involve relatively serious consequences for the service man or woman involved, then such an overabundance of caution is necessary. However, for relatively minor matters of discipline, it is too complex, too time-consuming and too risky for all parties. There is, however, a much faster, simpler and more efficient system for less serious breaches of discipline. The disciplinary infringement system, managed by discipline officers and trusted and preferred by defence members, is at every level. It doesn't involve court-like procedures. However, it does give service men and women the opportunity to be heard and imposes only fines, losses of privileges and reprimands. Cases can be dealt with in just a matter of days. As it stands, this system deals with matters such as short absences from duty, falling asleep on guard or failing to comply with a general order. ADF members tell me that it could accomplish so much more. The bill before the House abolishes the complex and distrusted subordinate summary authority, and expands and improves the disciplinary infringement system to give ADF members the option of being dealt with by it for an expanded range of matters. The bill introduces the role of senior discipline officer and provides that these senior discipline officers can deal with more serious matters, such as longer absences without leave, insubordinate or insulting language, causing a disturbance, being drunk on duty, unauthorised use of military vehicles or the negligent discharge of a weapon. These are doubtless more serious breaches of discipline, but they do not require a full court process to be resolved, nor as isolated cases do they require imprisonment or discharge to follow. As such, with the proper oversight of the unit's commanding officer, these matters can and should be resolved quickly and simply. This bill will formalise the process for allowing that to take place. However, a disciplinary system needs not only efficiency and effectiveness but also to enforce a set of standards which keep pace with changes in society. Like any other part of our nation, the military is not immune to the increasing and shifting influence of technology in our lives. Like young people across our society, serving members of our ADF use social media to communicate with each other and with friends and family outside the services. Like so many others, they're exposed to not only the many benefits of social media but also, in all too many cases, the dangers that it can bring. Although the vast majority of our serving men and women are absolutely upstanding professionals, under the pressures of an intense and sometimes dangerous environment, a small minority choose to abuse, bully or harass others online. We've seen evidence of such behaviour in recent years through the alleged involvement of serving ADF personnel in online forums such as the Instagram page State Sanctioned Violence in 2020 or the Facebook group SNAFU in 2017, which have not only glorified criminal acts but also posted abusive and violent material about women and minority groups. Such behaviour is fundamentally at odds with the values of the ADF, and it is deadly to the morale, discipline and order of a fighting unit. Worse, the consequences of bullying and abuse can be devastating for the individuals who experience it. In the inevitably close quarters of a ship or a military base, there can sometimes be no escape. Former soldier and paratrooper Anna Maria Lang has spoken out recently about her post-traumatic stress disorder and her attempt to take her own life. She ascribes these experiences not to the pressures of service themselves but to the sexual discrimination and bullying that she experienced from some of her fellow soldiers. The availability and anonymity of social media makes abuse like this not only easier but more difficult to trace. However, where it can be tracked down and a culprit identified, the ADF must have access to serious sanctions to stamp it out and to hold those who perpetrate it to account. This bill introduces two new service offences related to cyberbullying. One makes it a service offence to use social media or another online service in a way that is offensive, threatening or intimidating, or to harass or humiliate another. In order to ensure that harm is minimised, it creates a further service offence of failing to comply with an order to remove material that has been deemed to be cyberbullying by a service tribunal. By creating these offences, this bill allows this conduct to be dealt with by the summary authority or court martial system, with a maximum sentence of two years imprisonment for either offence. Since 2015, this government has ensured that, in the civilian world, those who have experienced cyberbullying have a channel, the eSafety Commissioner, to help them get offending material removed and the perpetrators held to account. With this bill, we're extending some of the same protections to our serving men and women and helping to show the seriousness with which the ADF treats this issue. At a time when Australia faces an ever more complex and threatening international environment, it's important to remember what it is that ensures Australia's national defence. US general and founding father George Washington said: 'Discipline is the soul of an army. It makes small numbers formidable; procures success to the weak and esteem to all.' Whilst small in number, the ADF is one of the most disciplined and professional armed forces in the world, and I've had the great privilege of seeing many of these men and women serving in many different parts of this world. In a region where potential threats to our country could come from much larger nations with greater material resources to command, it is discipline, our material and the professionalism of our service men and women that we will depend on for our national security. By streamlining the ADF's disciplinary processes and bringing them up to date with the world around us, this bill will contribute to maintaining our Defence Force's soul and keeping it a formidable opponent to be reckoned with. I want to close by acknowledging the work done by the new minister for veterans and defence personnel and his staff in bringing this bill and the way that he's consulted the backbench committee, which I chair. I want to acknowledge the work of the previous minister, the member for Gippsland, and his incredibly hardworking staff as well. Both ministers have done a lot of work on this bill. This bill has been a long time in the making. I have spoken with the senior officers who have guided and steered the preparation of this bill. If I remember correctly, this bill has been about eight years in the making. It has been somewhat complex, and a lot of work has gone into it. I want to acknowledge the work of Senator McLachlan, who is an ex-colonel of the Australian Army. He was a legal officer, and we had the privilege of being able to get the wisdom of his experience in reviewing this bill. So I'm a little concerned to hear some members opposite say that this is a bill that should go off to the Senate for further review. This bill has been a long time in the making. There's been such a considerable amount of work that's been done on this bill not just by the ministers but by the ADF themselves, and it has the support of the government. I urge all members in this place to support the bill. 19:11 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon During question time we heard about the deaths of two soldiers near Townsville, so I want to send my condolences to those soldiers' families and their mates, because they will obviously be doing it very tough at the moment. This bill, the Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021, is about our ADF. Whether it be on operations, as we have seen in the last week or so, or during training, dangerous situations can occur. We try and manage that risk to the best of our abilities, but incidents like this can happen. So we send our condolences. We also heard honourable members speak earlier today on the centenary of the ANF, the Australian national flag, and it's something that all servicepeople cherish. It's worn on your uniform. Those members of our ADF that have been in harm's way recently proudly wear our Australian national flag. This bill is about discipline, and I can remember, when I was going through training, being disciplined if the Australian national flag hit the ground. You could never do that. It was a big no-no. Even today, as a local federal member, when I go to a school and give the kids a flag, I'm always a bit nervous when they are pulling it out of that bag and trying to teach them the importance of not letting that flag touch the ground. As an aside, it's been expressed to me by several veterans how disappointed they are that our Prime Minister sees the need to wear an Australian national flag on his face as a COVID mask. I call on all members opposite, particularly those with defence experience, to go and have a chat with the Prime Minister. Why is it that he sees the need to use our Australian national flag as a prop on his face during COVID? Use one of the same ones that we all use, Prime Minister, because it doesn't impress anyone out there, particularly not those who wear that ANF proudly. But I digress. Police Remembrance Day was spoken about earlier, and I don't think the relationship between the ADF and the police has ever been closer than it is at the moment. They're working together on their various tasks very closely. They both sign up to serve and protect. That is the calibre of these men and women who join our forces. I want to associate myself with a speech by the member for Gorton in relation to a previous bill, where he talked about the service of our ADF members that we're so proud of in the last little while in Afghanistan but also more broadly. I join him in associating myself with those sentiments. Now to this bill. On 12 August 2021 the Minister for Defence Personnel and Minister for Veterans' Affairs introduced the Defence Legislation Amendment (Discipline Reform) Bill 2021 to progress changes to Defence discipline. There are a number of reasons that that bill was drafted, and now we debate it. I noticed that the last speaker was concerned that those on this side had suggested that perhaps this bill could go off to a committee for further scrutiny, because it had already been considered for eight years. But it's going to be considered and there'll be a report by that Senate committee in October. I think we owe it to our Defence Force members to have that little bit of extra scrutiny to make sure we've got the balance right between rights and streamlining administrative processes. Don't those opposite think that that short period of time, after eight years, is worthwhile? We want to make sure we get it right, don't we? The shadow minister for veterans' affairs and defence personnel, the member for Blair, set out the reasons behind this bill and how we got to where we are, so I won't repeat his extremely well-articulated position. However, I will make a couple of comments. Currently, about 80 per cent of disciplinary matters in the military involve relatively minor infringements which could in fact be dealt with more quickly, easily and fairly under the changes. We agree that that's the case. For example, being absent from duty could be dealt with in as little as two or three days with a reprimand or a fine of a day's pay. More serious breaches, such as insubordination or insubordinate conduct, would receive a more severe reprimand or a larger fine but could be managed within days. I've been guilty of both of those charges in my service to our nation. There was one evening I remember right here in Canberra, when I was going through training. I don't like to say that it was totally my fault, but we had a curfew of midnight and, somewhere between the Private Bin and Mooseheads, I lost track of time. A couple of comrades and I were late back to the Australian Defence Force Academy, and I was reprimanded for that. I wouldn't say it was a serious breach. Nevertheless, I think we've got to be realistic about minimising the amount of time that is wasted with these minor breaches whilst we still continue to give serious breaches the time that is required to get a fair and just outcome. This legislation is mostly good. Get it done, get the disciplinary action over and done with. Don't let it linger. Don't have ADF members overly stressed about this. We want them to know the seriousness, whatever that may be. But we also want to be able to crack on, because there are important operational reasons for us having everyone good to go. As I said, it's also important to ensure that a balance is struck between those administrative efficiencies and the preservation of ADF members' rights and access to justice. Therefore I do believe it was very prudent to refer the bill to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Legislation Committee for a short inquiry. I would like to think that those opposite, having taken eight years, wouldn't mind a little bit of parliamentary scrutiny. We don't want any unintended consequences at this point, so having a report from that committee by 14 October is in order. It's not too far away at all. Justice must be fair and effective. We must ensure that the ADF upholds the highest standards of behaviour, because they are ambassadors for our nation. Members of the ADF are incredibly professional as a rule, but previous members have highlighted some instances where behaviour has not met the standard required, and disciplinary action needs to be taken. But members of the ADF, like any Australians, are only human, so when they err, let's treat them fairly. That's the least that we owe them. 19:21 Mr CONNELLY 282984 Stirling I acknowledge the member for Solomon and other veterans in this place. There has been some healthy discussion about this proposed legislation. As did the member for Solomon, I confess to having been at the receiving end of discipline during my military service. Thankfully, it was nothing serious, but it does highlight the point, and the very real fact as well, that there is a great deal of complexity at that middle tier of the disciplinary system. It's referred to as the subordinate summary authority, and it's incredibly complex. There has been some really well-informed debate and a summary of this proposed legislation, but I'll just give a little bit of a sense of what that complexity actually looks like. Basically, even whilst serving as an officer cadet at the very start of my career at a military university—and the member for Solomon touched on this as well—I was taught about the Defence Force Discipline Act. We were given it in volumes 1 and 2. They were huge volumes. If you needed a computer screen stand, they were ideal. If you had to reach something a bit high up, they were also good to stand on. But, sadly, we also had to actually understand quite a bit of the information contained in the Defence Force Discipline Act. Not only that, we had to perform the duties of prosecution and defence in a way that is very similar to and, of course, mirrored an actual court of law. So, even whilst we were undertaking military studies, physical training, drill, military history and the many other things which are required in training to become a junior officer, we were trained in a quasi-judicial process. For example, when somebody was the subject of discipline, we had to learn and practise to be a prosecuting officer. In this sense, we had to gather evidence and make sure that it was all appropriately registered ahead of the trial date. Then we had to go into a courtlike proceeding and act as if we were a prosecuting officer. At the same time, we also had to learn the skills of being a defending officer. Here our role was on the flip side, defending the case against the accused, gathering evidence, interrogating witnesses and, if the accused was found to be guilty, offering a plea in mitigation. This was the circumstance where we would request that a situation be taken into account and a sentence be more lenient. Some of these quite full-on court processes were conducted for what were quite minor infringements, things like staying out a bit too late if you were having a good time with your friends or fraternising in the accommodation lines. These are things which really did not require or justify that level of detailed preparation and conduct. Further in my career, as I progressed to being a middle-ranking officer—a major—I was then required to actually fill the role of the subordinate summary authority. I heard the member for Fisher, in his earlier contribution, mention that he had even heard reports of full mock trials being conducted before an accused is actually brought in. I can confirm for the member for Fisher, and others who may be interested, that that is exactly what we used to do. That's because the level of complexity was so high that if we did get something wrong and it was a breach of proper process then the entire thing could all be for naught. It would either have to be re-run or, if there had been a significant breach of process, the whole thing may have been thrown out when it eventually got to a legal officer for review. On that point of legal officers: we have legal officers, as we do education providers, pilots and many other specialist trades brought into Defence to provide their expertise so that we can let war fighters do what they need to do, which is to train, to fight and to win wars. This really is why I'm so supportive of this bill—it enables Defence to focus on its core business, which is getting prepared, training for operations and reinforcing all of the knowledge, skills and attitudes that need to be done at platoon, company and battle group levels and, of course, above that. This bill will introduce changes which maximise what is working well—in particular, for these disciplinary infringements. Typically, these have been applied at the senior NCO level—something like a warrant officer being able to liaise with somebody in their unit who has allegedly conducted a minor infringement and, if there is no objection, applying a disciplinary infringement which is basic in nature but which obviously matches, in many cases, the offence itself. So it's very sensible in that regard. It will result in a system that will be far easier to use and it will reduce unnecessary delays. This is important, because if somebody has a pending infringement hanging over them for months or, potentially, longer then it can impact, certainly, their morale and that of the rest of the unit, and their ability to attend promotional courses and other training activities as well. So it's really important that we get in and deal with infringements quickly when they occur. I'm sure that for those of us who have been out there in the world of business, or even in the Public Service, there are systems in place where feedback is provided and correctional courses of action taken. Of course that feedback needs to be timely to correct behaviour, if it has strayed off course, and to ensure that we maintain good behaviour and discipline in any organisation. We've heard from some other contributors—and I absolutely back them on this point—that discipline is an absolutely critical component of defence. In fact, when I was very new in my career I was surprised to learn that discipline is referred to as a critical element of morale. One might think that soldiers, sailors and air men and women, being let free to roam about and not well supervised, might be ideal. But the reality is that it actually breaks down unit cohesion and it breaks down the trust that is so essential, as it underpins the effectiveness of any military fighting force. That's why it's important that we introduce these reforms. As did the member for Fisher, I commend the minister for his handling of this legislation and his engagement with the committee—the coalition backbench committee on defence and veterans. It's been really pleasing to see this brought forward in such a professional manner. As has been commented upon by others during this debate, we can see that the reform measures will result in a military discipline system which is a great deal easier to use and to understand. This will reduce the delays that I spoke about earlier and be much fairer to all of those involved. It will allow commanders at all levels to more simply and quickly address poor behaviour, create the opportunity for early intervention and enable our Defence Force and personnel to keep providing their valuable service. ADJOURNMENT 97 ADJOURNMENT National Anti-corruption Commission 97 19:30 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley [by video link] If the Liberal and National parties had a slogan, it would be 'one rule for me, another rule for thee'. For the past eight years, the Abbot-Turnbull-Morrison government have waltzed into parliament and popped up in the media spinning a false narrative that Labor can't be trusted with public money. They've told the Australian public that Labor debt is bad but Liberal debt is good. The reality is that Australia has never had a government that has spent so much public money with so little to show for it. To protect the Great Barrier Reef they gave almost half a billion dollars to an organisation with six full-time staff. They purchased the Leppington Triangle land at Western Sydney airport for $30 million when it was worth only $3 million. They gave Murdoch-owned Foxtel a $30 million grant to boost under-represented sports. The Deputy Prime Minister claimed $675,000 in expenses as a drought envoy and failed to produce a final report. And don't get me started on sports rorts. JobKeeper is the biggest wage subsidy program ever put in place by an Australian government, but it resulted in more waste than any Australian government program since Federation. By mid-2020 the Prime Minister and the Treasurer already had a report from Treasury warning that billions of JobKeeper dollars were going to companies with rising revenue. Flashing red lights should have gone off at that moment. Select figures released by the Parliamentary Budget Office have revealed that $8.4 billion was paid to almost 200,000 companies whose revenue increased from July to September 2020. I understand that bad forecasts happen, especially when the incentives for getting them wrong are so rewarding, but why isn't the Morrison government hunting down the massive corporations that received JobKeeper while their profits rolled in? The Treasurer doesn't think twice about clawing back debt from small-business owners, from people on JobSeeker or from parents who receive childcare subsidies, so why do these millionaire mates get a pass now? I was recently contacted by a psychologist and small-business owner in my electorate of Lilley who received a bill for almost $17,000 from the ATO. This psychologist received a bill because she claimed JobKeeper after projecting that her business would suffer a loss of 30 per cent during the pandemic, but she ended up losing only 28 per cent of her business during the pandemic. That loss, that two per cent, ended up being about $2,000 in difference, but it means she now has to pay almost $17,000 in JobKeeper payments. It beggars belief that Gerry Harvey is allowed to keep his $22 million in JobKeeper payments, while he brags in the media about doubling his profits during the pandemic, but a frontline healthcare worker who runs a small family business has to pay back her JobKeeper payments because she anticipatorily miscalculated her loss by $2,000. But those are the rules that the Treasurer drew, and that really shows you where the Morrison government's priorities lie. As we chart the path through Australia's COVID recovery in the months and years ahead, Australia's taxpayers cannot afford any more of the waste that we have seen from the Morrison government. The ever-growing list of scandals and rorts surrounding the Morrison government shows why Australia needs a powerful and independent anticorruption commission. From the hundreds of millions spent on dodgy car parks and sporting grounds in Liberal electorates to the billions that have now been spent in JobKeeper payments to firms that actually increased their profits during the pandemic, it is clear that it is long past time for a Commonwealth body to be established to tackle corruption. Every state and territory government in Australia has its own anticorruption commission, but for some reason, after eight long years in office, the Liberals have refused to take any action to tackle corruption, leaving the Commonwealth as the only Australian government without a body dedicated to tackling corruption by public officials. I wonder why a government would resist establishing a commission to investigate government corruption for so long. I don't know, but I can tell you that federal Labor aren't afraid to shine a light. Labor's national anticorruption commission will also be able to follow the money, meaning it can investigate private individuals as well as help restore Australian people's trust in their government. (Time expired) COVID-19 98 19:35 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls [by video link] COVID has thrown up many challenges for Australian citizens and also for people right around the world. All of these challenges, I suppose, are relative, especially when you look at how so many other countries have had to deal with all the troubles that they've have had. But right now, on the Australian scale of disruption and damage, there is no city in Australia that has had to deal with more than what Shepparton has faced over the past eight days. The city, with around 50,000 to 60,000 people, has had up to one-third of its entire population tied up in a 14-day isolation lockdown. It has been quite extreme. This came around by having so many of our largest school campuses in Shepparton becoming tier 1 exposure sites. This sent approximately 800 students from each of these campuses home to isolate for 14 days, but it also literally meant that 3½ thousand family members of those 800 students were also sent home to isolate at the same time. As each of our major schools became tier 1 exposure sites, thousands and thousands of families were sent home to isolate, and, as thousands of people turned up to get tested from last Sunday through to Monday, we had nurses and health professionals on the testing crews told to leave their spots on those crews to go home to isolate. This immediately led to people, who were lined up in cars last weekend to get tested, taking up to seven hours to achieve those tests. We need to send a big thankyou to groups such as the Australian Defence Force, who sent medicos into Shepparton to help get those testing crews back up to speed. We had health professionals coming in from Bendigo, from Geelong, from Wodonga and from Melbourne to assist, and we send a big thankyou to all of those workers for coming into Shepparton to help us with that work. We've also had to find a way to feed people who are unable to get to the supermarkets. We've had to find a way for supermarkets that were shut down—how are they going to be able to maintain their click-and-collect stores? They were able to come up with a system where supermarkets from surrounding towns—Echuca, Kyabram, Euroa, Seymour—were able to make click-and-collect trips into Shepparton to help out. We have also had to call on a range of people who haven't just stepped up in the last few days, but effectively work in this space each and every day of the year—and I go straight to Azem and Jeihan. They run Lutfiyes kebab shop in Shepparton, but they also run People Supporting People. They run barbecues to feed the homeless. They have their own feedlot out the back of their cafe where they have breakfast available for anybody who needs it each and every day of the year. They have stepped up to make literally hundreds and hundreds of meals, and I want to thank Azem and Jeihan for the work that they do. Jeremy Rensford, Jan Phillips, Kate Smith and their team over at Foodshare have done amazing work in making thousands and thousands of food and care packages available for the people who need that type of assistance. To Lisa McKenzie and her team, thank you again. Red Cross have sent so many volunteers out into the Goulburn Valley to assist and help feed these people who have had no other option but to accept this charity. People would know Shepparton as being an incredible producer of food and food-processing, with SPC and Campbell Soup Company and Unilever. We have fruit and food. We have thousands and thousands of people employed in the food production centres, and those industries have been crippled, so it has been very, very testing. I also need to thank the City of Greater Shepparton. Kim O'Keeffe, the mayor, and especially Rob Priestley, the deputy mayor, have done an amazing amount of work in advocating for the specific needs that this great city has had over the last couple of days, as has the Committee for Greater Shepparton CEO, Sam Birrell, also an amazing leader. Currently, some of the schools which were originally classified as tier 1 exposure sites have been downgraded to tier 2. This has meant that in the last couple of days thousands and thousands of people have been able to go back to work. We are certainly hoping that this trend continues over the next few days. (Time expired) Afghanistan 99 19:40 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell [by video link] Afghanistan is a tragedy, and as the end to this 20-year war comes full circle, it ends where it began: with suicide bombers killing and maiming innocent people, the Taliban in control, and violence and fundamentalism on the rise again. I came into parliament as this war started. I was one of the many in this place who spoke out against Australia's involvement. Hundreds of thousands of Australians did so too. I would never have imagined in those early days that it would become Australia's longest war. Its purpose, its accomplishments, its failures and futilities will be measured by what its victims have experienced throughout these past 20 years, with many feeling it now more than ever. Whether it be the refugees and the dispossessed, the bravery and the deaths, or talk of geopolitics, the question will be: was it worth it after all? Only time will be able to tell. Today, however, I want to focus on my own community in my electorate of Calwell, which has been touched by this war in all its aspects. We're a community which counts amongst us one of the 41 Australian soldiers tragically lost to this war, as well as the many refugees fleeing its effects. Corporal Cameron Baird grew up in Gladstone Park in my electorate, where he attended Gladstone Views Primary School and graduated from Gladstone Park Secondary College. Cameron was the 40th Australian soldier to tragically die in Afghanistan. We've paid tribute to Corporal Baird in this parliament as the 100th recipient of the Victoria Cross of Australia award for valour—Australia's highest honour. When I visited the Al Minhad military base in the UAE some years ago, I was moved to see the Australian domestic compound of the joint task force named in memory of Corporal Baird. Our community of Broadmeadows is also home to the Melbourne Immigration Transit Accommodation Centre. In 2008 we began receiving the growing cohort of unaccompanied minors coming to Australia, predominantly from Afghanistan and Iraq. Both wars were still in full swing, and in this case minors were making the dangerous journey in desperation, seeking refuge and safety. My community at that time felt strongly about our responsibility to offer these young kids asylum and safe refuge, and, through our interaction with MITA, we got to know many of them very well. We knew then that they would go on to become great Australians, contributing to our society and enriching our own understanding of ourselves and the world around us. And they have gone on to do exactly that. I have remained in regular contact with many of them as they contribute to our vibrant, successful, multicultural Australia. In March of this year I spoke of the need to have pathways to permanency for refugees. A large number from Afghanistan are currently languishing in Australia, on TPVs and SHEVs, all of whom seek opportunities for safety and who in return want to make a contribution to this country. It shouldn't take historical markers of war to be displayed on our television screens for us to address this reality. It is my hope, and that of the hundreds who have written to me, that we face up to the challenge and do the right thing by the people of Afghanistan seeking refuge, for they have lived and breathed the horrors of this war for so long. People like my constituent Ali Reza Yunespour, a member of the board of directors at Community Refugee Sponsorship Australia, have expressed their grave concern about Australian citizens and visa holders in Afghanistan who missed the chance to be evacuated last week. They have spoken of those still at high risk and the need for the government to consider all diplomatic options, including working with the UNHCR in helping to get people out of Kabul. They have spoken of how we must work tirelessly for negotiated safe passage either through Kabul airport or through regional countries. This includes breathing life into our subclass 449 visas for those fleeing for safety, and offering temporary travel documents for those without any. With 20 years of sacrifice behind us, we need to do the right thing by the Australian soldiers who lost their lives, by the hundreds of soldiers who were injured, by the hundreds more who succumbed to the trauma of this war through suicide and of course by the people of Afghanistan. This means doing the right thing for Australia. As a country, we must open and increase our humanitarian settlement. Many throughout the country have written me, and I too, on behalf of those, ask that the government consider increasing our humanitarian intake for Afghanistan's refugees from 3,000 to 20,000. This should be an opportunity allowing us to bring to Australia and settle here the many, many victims of the war in Afghanistan. COVID-19: National Plan 100 19:45 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid Hope is a powerful thing. For nearly two years now the people of Reid have remained resilient. They have followed the public health orders, they have helped one another, they have made sacrifices. We all know it has not been easy and that to be resilient does not mean you cannot and do not struggle. I know that many people in my community are doing it incredibly hard right now. Many small businesses are just holding on. Families are fatigued. Kids want and need to get back to school. We know that even the strongest amongst us are not superhuman. Right now a storm is howling around us, but we cannot lose hope. We must stay the course and stick to our national plan for opening up safely at 70 and 80 per cent vaccination rates, a national plan that was agreed to by all the states and territories a month ago, a plan that was developed using world-leading experts at the Doherty institute and is based on the best possible scientific, medical and economic advice. It has made me despair in recent weeks to see the premiers of Western Australia and Queensland make remarks about not sticking to the national plan. They cannot pull the rug out from underneath Australians. They cannot give the community hope and then backtrack. The premiers and chief ministers agreed to the national plan and they must stick to it. To continue to peddle a COVID-zero strategy is unsustainable. The elimination of the delta variant is a fallacy. Vaccines are the only answer. We have not fought COVID-19 as members of this state or that state; we have fought it as Australians and we will continue to fight it as Australians. Just as we went into this battle together, we must come out of it together. We cannot allow some premiers to pull the handbrake when we are finally starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel. As the Treasurer has stated, we cannot have a situation where it is easier for an Australian to get to Canada than it is to get to Perth. If the premiers of Western Australia and Queensland won't open when four out of five Australians have had a double dose, then when will they open? The truth is that to walk away from a national plan would be to withdraw certainty and hope. It would leave businesses uncertain about their futures. It would keep people in the loop of not planning for tomorrow, not booking that flight to spend Christmas with loved ones. We must learn to live with COVID-19. We cannot continue to pause our lives and allow a few chest-beating premiers to put in jeopardy our way forward. We cannot continue to devastate businesses with harsh lockdowns, to keep kids studying at the kitchen table, to stop Australians from travelling around the country freely. This summer I want people of my community in Reid to be able to be surrounded by their loved ones, to be able to have those barbecues with friends and family, to attend those weddings, to open up their businesses fully. Yes, there may be some restrictions that linger, but we cannot have this uncertainty that certain premiers continue to propagate. Australians are doing their part by getting vaccinated in record numbers. Those premiers need to do their part and stick to the national plan that was agreed. Climate Change 100 19:49 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's sixth assessment report predicts a grim outlook for the future if the current emissions trajectory continues. Climate change is already causing untold destruction around the world. The 2019-20 summer fires here in Australia are now being replicated in the Northern Hemisphere where, in some places, temperatures are rising to record levels and nearing 50 degrees centigrade. In other places, floods, tornadoes and hurricanes are decimating whole regions, as Hurricane Ida is doing right now in Louisiana. Extreme weather events are not new, but the scale and ferocity of them is. Even with modern response equipment, know-how and resources, lives are being lost, ecosystems are being destroyed and species are becoming extinct. Every loss of the world's natural environment has a serious consequence, and whilst the environment has an extraordinary capacity to repair itself it cannot do so when climate changes permanently or when complete extinction occurs. The report is the work of hundreds of scientists from around the world over the eight years since 2013. It has undergone a rigorous process of review by government agencies across the world, and the report's assessment is more likely to be conservative than overstated. The report finds that atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide are higher than at any time in the last 10 million years and that global surface temperatures over the past decade—that is, from 2011 to 2020—were one degree centigrade higher than average temperatures a hundred years earlier, with larger increases of 1.59 degrees centigrade over land. Human influence has changed the climate at an unprecedented rate over the past 2,000 years. The rate of sea-level rise between 2006 and 2018 was around twice the rate between 1971 and 2006. Similarly, the rate of ice sheet loss increased by a factor of four between 1992 and 1999, and between 2010 and 2019. In Australia over recent decades, sea levels have been rising at a faster rate than the global average. According to the report, on current projections a global average temperature increase of 1.5 degrees centigrade will be reached in the near term. A temperature increase greater than 1.5 degrees centigrade will be catastrophic, and every fraction of a degree makes a difference. However, it is possible, with total commitment, to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees centigrade by the end of the century. To do that, immediate action must be taken. We must also immediately prepare for the inevitable consequences of rising temperatures, including coastal sea-level rises; weather pattern and rainfall changes; and more frequent and more severe weather events. Based on the latest science, the Climate Council has concluded that Australia must reduce its emissions by 75 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve net zero emissions by 2035. To do that requires federal government leadership—leadership which is sadly lacking by the Morrison government and which to date has been shown by state governments, industry leaders and by Australian communities. The lack of Morrison government leadership has been exposed by other world leaders and has caused major rifts within the coalition. We have a coalition government that is dictated to by the fossil fuel companies, who are in turn driven by profits and who do whatever they can to discredit the science. As with COVID-19, no country will be spared the costs and devastating effects of climate change. The costs of climate change and extreme weather events will dwarf the costs of the action that is needed. As with COVID, climate change is also a race against time. Industry and civic leaders know that, and are calling for political leadership and policy certainty. The Morrison government claims that Australia has exceeded its Kyoto commitments and is well on the way to meet and beat its Paris commitments. But those claims are based on questionable emission-accounting methodology. A more realistic assessment is that emissions have actually increased by around seven per cent since 2005. Currently, 131 countries, covering 73 per cent of global emissions, have adopted, or are considering adopting, net zero targets—but not Australia. Australia's emissions per capita are double those of China and almost three times those of the UK. The IPCC report indicates that Australia needs to reduce emissions by 43 per cent from 2020 to 2030—that's in less than a decade. The Prime Minister will very likely not be leading the nation in a decade's time, but future generations will pay dearly for his government's climate change failures. COVID-19: South Australia 101 19:54 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey It's very clear now that the delta variant of COVID-19 has new rules of contact. In South Australia we've watched as it has taken hold in New South Wales, with over a thousand cases being reported a day, and in Victoria, where it has reared its ugly head again—or, in the case of delta, for the first time—and it is currently displaying a very similar trajectory to that in New South Wales. The question is: can Victoria tame delta with the lockdown? I think the answer to that is probably that it is doubtful, sadly. In South Australia we've been watching and hoping—watching whether it will be brought under control and hoping that we can keep it out of South Australia. But, on 27 August, two truck drivers, I think originally coming out of Sydney—who weren't doing anything wrong, I point out; they were tested, as is industry practice—were tested in Perth and found to be positive. Obviously, to get from Sydney to Perth, you have to drive through a fair bit of Grey, and they'd passed through Port Augusta, where they stopped at roadhouses for fuel and food, and through Ceduna and Nundroo on the 21st and again on the 25th. So I don't exactly know their travel path. But, either way, we're about five days in from that last point where they could have infected people. So the alerts are out and the QR data, credit card purchases and CCTV are being examined to see who was at these premises at the allotted times. Very disturbingly, quite a number of people are not using the QR codes, and I think perhaps that's a sign of complacency in living in South Australia, where we've had a pretty clear run for some time. There are now 100 people in isolation—just precautionary. Ten are firefighters in Port Augusta, which is just because of where the fire truck was at the time, in proximity, and that's a concern for the local community. Thus far, 20 have shown negative tests. That's encouraging. So far, so good. But it does remind us of the reality of COVID and its presence with us today. It reminds us that we need to follow the rules and use the QR codes, and, I point out, get vaccinated. The latest figures I have for Grey suggest we are around the national averages, with around 30 per cent fully vaccinated and more than 50 per cent having had one jab. There's a bit of variation between communities, but I think that's generally not bad. I accept there's some resistance to vaccination and individuals are unhappy about the compulsion, particularly in the aged-care and disabilities industry, but I say to them: 'It's an increasing trend. We're seeing more and more countries around the world, more and more jurisdictions, and more and more businesses actually signalling the fact that they are going to insist on vaccination.' I think, if you look to the future, it's difficult to see us travelling on international airlines, for instance, without having to be vaccinated. I've heard all kinds of arguments about the reasons not to get vaccinated: 'It's not safe', 'It's not tested', 'It doesn't stop you getting COVID', 'COVID's not dangerous', 'COVID's not real' and, 'There's no COVID around here at the moment, so why would I worry at the moment?' And there's been a lot of bad reflection on AstraZeneca: 'Why would I have AstraZeneca? That's the bad one.' I point out that the Prime Minister said today, just after question time, that 9.6 million Australians have had AstraZeneca vaccinations. I believe the number worldwide—I can't quite verify it—is around one billion, and it's a very safe and effective vaccine. I use the New South Wales figures to try to convince people that it is a good idea to get vaccinated. There are currently 813 people in hospital as a result of COVID infections, with 126 in ICUs and 54 on ventilators. Of the 126 in ICUs, 113 are not vaccinated. Of the remaining 13, 12 have had one dose and just one has received two doses. There have been 76 deaths in total in the latest outbreak. The death rate, encouragingly, in New South Wales is much lower than Victoria's was last year when they had their outbreak, which really hit seniors. I think that's a reflection of the fact that we have quite high vaccination rates now amongst seniors. So, as someone summed up before me, and I think it nails this pretty well, COVID is going to be a disease of the unvaccinated. House adjourned at 19:59