2021-10-25 1 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Monday, 25 October 2021

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

DOCUMENTS 1 DOCUMENTS Parliament House 1 Presentation 1 10:01 The SPEAKER 00APG I present the Presiding Officers' statement regarding the condition of Parliament House. COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Petitions Committee 1 Report 1 PETITIONS 2 PETITIONS Presentation 2 10:01 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn On behalf of the Standing Committee on Petitions, and in accordance with standing order 207, I present the following petitions: Immigration Detention 2 Safety, Compensation and Rehabilitation Act 2 PETITIONS 3 PETITIONS Responses 3 10:01 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn Ministerial responses to petitions previously presented to the House have been received as follows: Jetstar 3 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 3 COVID-19: Vaccination 4 COVID-19: Cruise Industry 4 Agriculture Industry 5 COVID-19: International Travel 6 Racism 7 COVID-19: Vaccination 7 International Travel 8 Australian Constitution 8 Social Media 9 Skilled Migration Program 9 COVID-19: Quarantine 10 COVID-19: Vaccination 10 Member for Mitchell 11 COVID-19: Vaccination 11 COVID-19: Vaccination 11 COVID-19: Vaccination 12 Social Media 13 Australian Constitution 14 Australian Broadcasting Corporation 14 PETITIONS 15 PETITIONS Statements 15 10:01 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn In contrast to last week's presentation, which had 153 petitions, this presentation has only two. The combination of the sitting pattern and the four-week period that e-petitions are open to collect signatures means that only paper petitions with handwritten signatures are being presented today. The Committee meets each Wednesday that the House sits to consider and certify petitions, and at other times when there is a long break between sittings. Paper petitions are provided to the Committee for certification with signatures already collected, and can therefore be presented at the next opportunity, whereas the presentation of certified e-petitions cannot occur until their signature collection period has passed. There are currently 163 e-petitions open for collecting signatures. These were certified by the committee at meetings held over the past weeks and will be presented when the House next sits in November. Another large presentation of petitions is expected at that time, on behalf of the many Australians who have created and signed in support of the important matters that each petition concerns. Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I look forward to further updating the House on the work of the Petitions Committee. COMMITTEES 15 COMMITTEES Tax and Revenue Committee 15 Report 15 10:03 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar Mr Speaker, it is very good to see you this morning! The SPEAKER 00APG You too, member for Mackellar! Mr FALINSKI G86 On behalf of the Committee on Tax and Revenue, I present the committee report entitled: The development of the Australian corporate bond market: A way forward together with the minutes of proceedings. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Mackellar may proceed. Mr FALINSKI G86 Thank you, Mr Speaker. Your generosity and kindness are renown throughout the land. I know this will be the most important thing we do in this House today, not that the galahs up in level 2 will realise that or the media will report it or that this will lead to television news tonight, but the corporate bond market and the retail segment of it remain critical to the future of Australians, of Australian companies, of Australia's economy and for those Australians who are, at this moment, considering retiring. Too many good ideas in our nation are funded by taxpayers through the university system, through R&D grants and concessions in our tax system, and, just as they are getting ready to become commercially viable and successful ventures, they leave our shores for the primary reason of seeking capital in other countries that have access to risk capital. So, when you look at Atlassian for example, it was funded generously by the Australian taxpayer, but, when the point came when they were to become a successful commercial entity, they had to list on the Nasdaq in North America and then list on the London Stock Exchange. The reason for this is we don't have enough risk capital in Australia. The retail corporate bond market can help fix that problem. Also, when you look at Australia, we have all the necessary blocks in place to be a major global centre for the bond market: we have a large pool of savings; we have a common law system of justice and governance through our court system that is both well-understood and is not biased or discretionary; and, most of all, we have a large number of skilled workers in this country and well-developed market systems, whether it be the Australian Stock Exchange or other market mechanisms that make bond markets so successful in the rest of the world. Then, there are the demographics. Too many Australians find themselves having to invest as they get to the age of 55-plus—that's really old, Mr Speaker, as you know! Once you reach 55, that becomes a very old age! At that point you start thinking of retirement, you start thinking of how to live out those twilight years of your life, and it is important at that point in time that you have access to investments that can continue to give you a steady stream of income but do not have the downside of, say, bitcoin or the Australian Stock Exchange. So, it is important that we have these sorts of assets available for those Australians who about to commence their retirement years. What are the blockages? Given that we are so well set up for these things, the blockages are all in the regulators. There is a form of tax that needs to be reformed by this parliament, but ASIC's active disinterest and discouragement in a retail corporate bond market, I think, verges on a derogation of their duty, and Treasury's inability and refusal to look at this area is extremely disappointing and a disservice to the Australian people. When you look across the ditch in New Zealand, they undertook the reforms that our report is advocating. New Zealand, a much smaller nation than ours and without the structural advantages that our economy has, has a larger, broader, deeper, more liquid bond market than Australia does. This is unacceptable, at any level. Finally, the chance for us to make this work is long overdue. It gives new meaning to the word 'urgent'. I would like to thank the secretariat for all their help and assistance on this, especially during COVID when all of the hearings were done online. I'd like to thank the member for Kingsford Smith who came up with a catchy title to this report, which I know will live on long after I've stopped speaking, and, most of all, I would like to thank the parliament for making this investigation possible. 10:09 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith by leave—I also join with the chair of this committee, Mr Falinski, in commending the report to the parliament. Mr Falinski is right; Australia doesn't have enough of an appetite for risky investment in this country, and we have a fairly weak corporate bond market by comparison with other nations. A corporate bond, of course, is a debt security. It's issued by entities to finance their business operations. And, unlike equity, it doesn't dilute corporate ownership or ownership of the company. It's riskier than government bonds, and that's typically because it relies on the solvency of the company into the future. And the compensation, if you like, for the riskier nature is the offer of a higher coupon payment. In terms of the Australian market, in 2019-20 the value of bonds issued by Australian corporate entities both domestically and offshore was $1.7 trillion. Most of that is held by large superannuation funds—about $60 billion worth of it. But 95 per cent of it is issued domestically to wholesale investors, who have to be registered with APRA and are known as sophisticated investors. There's very little to no offerings to retail investors through the ASX. One of the reasons for that is there's a complicated regulatory process that companies have to go through in terms of disclosure—offering a prospectus—before they can get on to the ASX. It has to be registered with ASIC. That's one of the factors the committee has identified as a barrier to more corporate bonds being issued here in Australia. So less than one per cent of corporate bonds held in Australia is owned by private investors—less than one per cent. Compare that to the United States, which we all know has that entrepreneurial investment ethos and culture, where 20 per cent of corporate bonds are held by private investors. So, there's a big difference. Even New Zealand has a much more liquid and deeper corporate bond market than Australia. Is this something that we should be trying to encourage? Well, the committee is of the view that we should. And the reason is that, if you have more options for investment, you diversify that risk, you increase competition and there are better deals available. And ultimately you grow the pool of investment funds that are available and that, hopefully, spurs entrepreneurship, startups and investment in new jobs and new opportunities in this country. So, what are the problems that the committee has identified? There's certainly a lack of awareness and understanding about how the corporate bond market works for retail investors in Australia, and that comes down to a lack of information and a lack of confidence. There are market access barriers. The minimum parcel and size of bonds that can be issued is $500,000. So most are not traded on the ASX directly. It's concentrated in banking, in finance and insurance, and less than five per cent of those that are offered is in other areas—for instance, manufacturing. The credit rating is generally only available to wholesale investors. There are onerous disclosure requirements. As I mentioned, you have to register with the ASX but also with ASIC. ASIC did issue a class order to streamline those disclosure requirements in 2014, but, according to KPMG's evidence to our committee, that process has failed and hasn't resulted in an increased take-up. But the real issue in terms of why we don't have a deeper and more liquid corporate bond market in Australia is simply the taxation treatment; and it's the difference between the issue of shares and corporate bonds. Tax concessions are available on investment in shares in Australia. It's quite topical. It's known as dividend imputation. You get a franking credit for the tax paid by the company on the dividend for the amount, and it sometimes results in a refund. We all know about that on this side of the chamber. No such tax concession exists for corporate bonds. As a result, where do you think Australians put their money? They put their money where the tax concession is, and that is in shares. Although we've made some great recommendations here, I think the reality is that, until you deal with that difference in the tax concessions between corporate bonds and shares, you're not going to get the uptake that you see in other nations throughout the world. So that's an issue that perhaps the parliament has to look at in the future. Nonetheless, this is a good report with some great recommendations around lowering the minimum investment amount, early redemption, the role of trustees and, of course, recommendations regarding disclosure requirements. I particularly point to the ASX submission, at paragraph 3.31 in the report, where they have issued some great recommendations regarding ASX 200 issuers with a term sheet and a cleaning notice and issuers outside of the ASX 200 with a reformed simple corporate bond prospectus, early redemption—which the committee has picked up—and removing anomalies and efficiencies in the existing two-part prospectus regime. They're some great recommendations that the government should look at. I commend the report to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG The time allotted for statements on this report has expired. Does the honourable member for Mackellar wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a later occasion? 10:15 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar Yes, I move: That the House take note of the report. The SPEAKER 00APG In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Reference to Federation Chamber 17 10:15 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar I move: That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate. Question agreed to. BILLS 17 BILLS Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill 2021 17

Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill 2021

First Reading 17 Second Reading 17 10:17 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I am pleased to reintroduce the Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill 2021 to the House. The purpose of this bill is as vital as it is simple: to establish a robust integrity commission to restore public trust, confidence and pride in the parliament and their democracy. Now more than ever, we need to pass this bill. The Australian Federal Integrity Commission model I've proposed in this bill would enable clear and practical responses to allegations of serious and systemic corruption issues at the federal level in the public interest. In its most recent comprehensive review, the Centre for Public Integrity ranked this bill the best model of an integrity commission in the nation. AFIC would have appropriate powers to receive referrals, assess allegations, conduct investigations and issue findings. The bill specifically allows for public referrals. It is vital that any Australian and all public servants have a reputable body that they can trust with corruption concerns and that will protect them as whistleblowers. This bill provides just that. As a safeguard, this bill also includes protections against frivolous, vexatious or otherwise baseless claims. These provisions would allow the commission to vet referrals and protect the reputations of all involved. AFIC would be retrospective. I want to be clear: this bill would not apply new laws to past facts. If conduct was criminal at the time, it was criminal at the time. All integrity commissions in this nation are retrospective, and this bill is no different in that regard. We must be able to examine serious past conduct so we can learn from our mistakes and improve as a democracy. AFIC also uses a clear, broad and sensible definition of corruption that is fit for purpose, and does not duplicate the work of our criminal justice system. When it comes to investigations, AFIC must focus on conduct that is serious or systemic in nature. AFIC will also be empowered to hold public hearings when in the public interest. Over the past two years, I've spoken with many about their views on public hearings and I've incorporated concerns from both sides of this House into a balanced public interest test in part 5 of the bill to ease those concerns. For example, all persons called to give evidence will have a rolling right to request a private hearing and can present their reasons for this in private with the commissioner. The public interest test balances the overarching need for transparency with other factors, such as how serious or systemic the corruption issue is, any unfair exposure of a person's private life and unfair prejudice to personal reputation, even if by simple association with the commission by name during a hearing. This bill is more refined than any other on the table. This bill is the culmination of over a decade of prior consultation, over a decade of committee inquiries and over a decade of evaluations of the strengths and weaknesses of the ICAC laws that exist in every jurisdiction in this country except this one. This bill has the endorsement of some of the finest legal minds who have served on the High Court, Federal Court and supreme courts across this nation. Tomorrow, it will be one year to the day since I first introduced this bill to the House. It is clear we need a robust federal integrity commission now more than ever, and that the government will not introduce a bill capable of passing this parliament before the election. It's now been over 1,000 days since the Prime Minister promised this nation a robust federal integrity commission. It's a proposal which, unlike this bill, will put integrity scandals involving politicians and their staff in a black box, never to be heard of again. The Centre for Public Integrity has described it as 'the weakest watchdog' in the country, and it's been roundly rejected by every expert in the nation. I've watched on with dismay over the past year as scandals have poured out from both sides of politics. From branch stacking, to fund rorting and blind trusts, the longer we go without a robust integrity commission, the more the Australian people will lose faith in each and every one of us. We can do so much better. With respect to colleagues on all sides, a bill for a federal integrity commission from a major party would almost certainly descend into partisan games and mudslinging. An important reform like this is much better coming from the crossbench where we can foster bipartisanship. Australians do not want to head into the next election without a robust federal integrity commission. This is the way we can deliver it. If the government, including members of the backbench, want to deliver for their constituents and the Australian people, then it's incumbent upon them to support this bill. We can debate it. We can amend it. But this is the bill. I commend this bill to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 10:22 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I am very proud to second this bill to establish an Australian federal integrity commission, presented by the member for Indi. The member for Indi has done the work. The Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill 2021 is absolutely the legislation the Australian people expect to be put into place to ensure we clean up our federal politics. An integrity commission with teeth is needed more than ever. This 46th Parliament has seen an appalling level of secrecy, shocking incidents, cover-ups and very questionable conduct from all layers, from backbenchers to ministerial levels—spending of public funds without due process or any transparency, an increase in the level of objection to any kind of freedom-of-information requests, a real obstruction to any kind of transparency. An integrity commission with teeth would be able to investigate whether there is any question to answer and whether any corruption has occurred in looking at issues like the member for Pearce's blind trust. The public is astounded at the events that can occur in this place. We've seen the government hiding behind the absence of an integrity commission and the use of whatever tools they've had at their disposal to prevent a thorough investigation. By contrast, we have seen our two biggest states' integrity commissions in action over the past week. They are hard at work. This week both the New South Wales and Victorian integrity commissions are in full swing investigating potential misuse of public funds through grants and branch stacking and use of public resources to pay for political activity. And yet at a federal level there is no proper body to investigate serious allegations of abuse of position or power. Regular surveys show that 80 per cent of Australians support the establishment of a federal anticorruption watchdog. The closest thing we have at the moment is the Auditor-General's office, a body that is looking into scandals at the federal level, revealing further damning reports just last week into the administration of grants funds, showing that, by value, most grants—42 per cent—are awarded through a closed, noncompetitive selection process, and that 20 per cent had a reported selection process that was different to that reported for their related opportunities. This adds to the already long list of scandals, including car park rorts, sports rorts and the Leppington land sale for Sydney's second airport, to name just a few. The Auditor-General is going above and beyond to investigate such matters with severely limited resources. A federal integrity commission would provide a forum for proper investigation and inquiry, an opportunity for wrongdoers to be exposed but also for those wrongly accused to be exonerated, and for due process to be followed. We don't want trial by media; we want thorough investigation. We need proper process. All sides of politics claim to support the need for a federal integrity commission, but the Australian people have seen very little action. I agree with the member for Indi that, to avoid the partisan slinging match that we see all too often in this place, it is a proposal from the crossbench that has that ability to bring together the best model possible. A federal integrity commission with retrospective powers is needed now more than ever to ensure that this record-breaking spending and all the events and allegations we've seen from both sides of politics are properly investigated. We've seen in this parliament a disregard and carelessness for accountability and good governance, which is dangerous. I would say it's an insult to the Australian people and our communities. Australians are subject to rules and expectations in their duties, in their jobs. There is no reason for public servants, MPs and senators and their staff not to be held to the same standards. It's time to bring on for debate the Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill. The Australian people deserve better. They deserve to trust in the government, trust in the decisions of this place and trust that there is a process to ensure integrity and anticorruption. I commend the bill to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Disclosure of Political Donations) Bill 2021 19

Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Disclosure of Political Donations) Bill 2021

First Reading 19 Second Reading 20 10:28 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I move: That this bill be now read a second time. It's a pleasure to introduce the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Disclosure of Political Donations) Bill 2021. As an Independent, transparency and integrity are at the heart of what drives me and the people who put me here. Political access and influence should never be for sale, and any laws that facilitate such access and influence have no place in our democracy and should be urgently reformed. This is one such reform. I'm proud to disclose the names and amounts of every single donation I receive above $1,000 every financial quarter. That includes smaller cumulative donations from the same person that, together, total over $1,000. I'm also committed to disclosing the names of anyone who cumulatively donates more than the Australian Electoral Commission threshold of $14,500 within five business days. This bill would require the major parties to do the same. Under current laws, the major parties only have to disclose donations received above $14,500 to the Australian Electoral Commission each financial year. That means that millions and millions of dollars in donations from lobbyists, energy companies, gambling enterprises and other powerful businesses go into their coffers without being disclosed for months and months on end. Around election time, it's common for these donations not to be disclosed until long after Australians go to the ballot box. The major parties also use their complex organisational structures to hide exactly where the donations come from, which candidates they go to, and for what purpose. At the last election, it was common for some candidates bankrolled by the major parties to have zero dollars listed in their declaration to the Australian Electoral Commission, and that's just completely unacceptable. Australians deserve to know who is holding the purse strings of the major parties before voting for them. Politicians are meant to represent the people, not their donors. The parliaments of New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland have all set a disclosure threshold on political donations at $1,000. New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia also require near-real-time disclosure of donations. Right now there is no equivalent law at the federal level, and this bill would fix that. would fix that. I often hear the major parties argue that it's too resource intensive to disclose their donations in real time, but really, if I can do so as an Independent, then the major parties certainly can as well, which is why I've introduced this bill: to show Australians reforms like this are entirely possible if the will is there from the people to see us do better. This bill also includes penalties for political parties who do not follow political donation disclosure rules. While this is an important compliance measure, I do believe that the best way for us to achieve true and enduring change in our democracy is if we shift from a culture of compliance and finding loopholes to one that's focused on integrity, which is why this bill is the perfect complement to the Australian Federal Integrity Commission Bill I just introduced, which would invest in programs that improve the culture of political integrity and transparency in Canberra. It, too, had provisions dealing with election bribery, election fraud and breaches of lobbying codes of conduct. This bill also complements the work done by the member for Warringah on truth in political advertising and the member for Mayo on the regulation of political text messages, and I'll be proud to second these bills later on this morning too. I also commend the work that the member for Clark has done on the crossbench to introduce a cap on political donations in this country as well as reform on foreign donations. The last tranche of donations data released by the AEC earlier this year found that Australia's weak political donation laws allowed the major parties to hide the origins of more than a billion dollars in income and donations over the past two decades. That is simply unacceptable by any measure. Once again, the crossbench appears to be the place where genuine and ambitious reforms to political donations and transparency are coming from in this parliament. This is a first step the major parties could take to show the Australian people that they're serious when they give lip-service to transparency and accountability at the next election. I commend this bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is the motion seconded? 10:33 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I proudly, again, second the motion for the second reading of the member for Indi's bill, the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Disclosure of Political Donations) Bill 2021. This bill will increase transparency of political donations by reducing the threshold for disclosure of political donations from $14,500 to $1,000, increasing the reporting frequency to every quarter for donations of $1,000 and above, and requiring that donations above $14,500 be reported within five days. Currently, there's already a double standard between the time line of donation reporting for Independents here on the crossbench and the time line for the major parties. I welcome these changes. For too long, money has been hidden from view and from public scrutiny. We do not know who is paying for access to politicians and members in this place and for influence over decisions. The documentary Big Deal, recently aired on the ABC and viewed by many around the country, has shocked many Australians. There's no doubt that money has a disproportionate role in and impact on Australian politics. It was revealed that over 55 per cent of donations to the ALP and over 65 per cent of donations to the coalition were undisclosed. The unashamed portrayal of cash for access and influence was and remains horrifying. As Clive Palmer's United Australia Party spends obscene amounts of money advertising its deceptive platform, we are at risk of upheaval like after the US 2020 election. We've already seen it in our major cities, with rioters against COVID health orders. Transparency is essential to good governance and public trust in democracy. Our democracy should not be for sale. At the last election, only 25 per cent of Australians had trust in the federal government—according to the Australian National University, an all-time low. And I would suggest that the events of this parliament have done nothing to help that trust. I have no doubt that the lack of transparency contributes heavily to that and I urge both sides of politics, the major parties, to embrace this bill—to embrace reform. We have seen an all-time low when it comes to accountability and transparency. There's always a lot of gaslighting, there are always a lot of statements made by both sides of politics, but very little action; it never translates into actual legislative action. I would strongly say to this parliament and to the Australian public that that is what the crossbench is delivering. We are looking at reforms, the governance that needs to happen in this place, to ensure we raise the bar. We need to raise the standard of Australian federal politics. It's absolutely time for this place to earn back the trust of the Australian people. We need to reveal where the donations are coming from. There needs to be transparency. Our political system, our democracy, simply should not be for sale to the highest bidder. So I thank the member for Indi for bringing this bill to the House. Today is a day when integrity and standards are being pushed by the crossbench. We are seeing a number of pieces of legislation. From lies in political advertising to donations to spam to an integrity commission, these are all important questions of governance that need addressing, and I urge the members of this place to debate and vote on this legislation and other bills presented today. I commend the bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 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. Social Media (Basic Expectations and Defamation) Bill 2021 21

Social Media (Basic Expectations and Defamation) Bill 2021

First Reading 21 Second Reading 21 10:38 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Social media is playing an increasingly significant role in our lives. It's where we make friends, do business, stay connected with loved ones and, for many, find out the news of the day. It has never been more entrenched in our lives than right now. Many of us, and, importantly, our children and grandchildren, have been glued to screens throughout the pandemic. Right now, we can only guess what impact this will have on their minds and mental health into the future. This is why we need to do everything possible to ensure social media is safe for all users. While our government is working hard to prevent the spread of dangerous material through the Online Safety Act, we need to go further and hold social media services to account—as publishers—for the content posted on their websites. Content posted on social media sites is pushed around the world, far and wide, and the platforms are intelligent, using AI to show individual preferences. So, when content that seriously defames another person is promoted to a wider audience, the social media service, along with the end user, should be responsible for damages. For too long social media platforms have hidden behind the shield of protecting free speech, while at the same time moderating their platforms—often with arbitrary rules. Freedom of speech is an inherent right that we must protect at all costs, but it is not a right to lie or incite violence. Free speech is vital to our democracy, but there must be limitations to prevent harm. We need consistency from social media platforms to ensure we strike the right balance, and this won't be achieved if we leave these platforms to be a law unto themselves with no penalties. Big tech platforms write their own rules and this is causing serious issues for end users. The rules are inadequate and are sporadically enforced, with no external accountability. I have personal experience of how these issues can affect people's lives. For several months in 2020, my husband and I, as well as the charity we founded to help single mothers access education, were the target of baseless and defamatory accusations made by a conspiracy theorist on Facebook. It was unrelenting for months. Claims were widely distributed and reached local networks in my electorate of Mallee. To this day I still see echoes of the insane conspiracies this person continues to espouse. It was an incredibly trying time, including for the young mothers that rely on this essential charity in our community. I was concerned that these mothers would be driven away from the service by lies and left even more vulnerable. I pursued a legal course of action against her in a civil case but it cost my husband and I, personally, upwards of $200,000. Through this horrible experience I have been inspired to take action and to use my position to seek to prevent others going through this. What concerns me is that many thousands of people who endure bullying and defamation online will lack the means to clear their name or protect their family; we need measures in place to stop these cases rising. At the moment, there's very little impetus on social media services to ensure safety and protect users from harm and defamation. This bill aims to change that by making these services jointly liable for the perpetration of defamatory material hosted online. It also allow the minister to outline basic expectations for the distribution of defamatory material and gives the eSafety Commissioner the power to issue fines for breaches of these expectations. These are important changes and build on our government's progress of making social media safe for Australians by addressing the distribution of defamatory material. This bill fills an important gap left by the Online Safety Act. It also builds on the collaborative work of the Parliamentary Friends of Making Social Media Safe, co-chaired by myself and the member for Newcastle. I'm focused on fighting for change to ensure that our kids and grandkids are safe online, and that our society has a healthy relationship with social media going forward. I defer the rest of my time to the member for Berowra. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is there a seconder to the motion? 10:42 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra I am pleased to second the motion by the member for Mallee. I admire the member for Mallee for her dedication to a safer social media environment, and I admire her for her courage, as a new member of parliament, for taking on the social media trolls and seeking a better deal for all Australians online. The member for Mallee has done great work preparing this Social Media (Basic Expectations and Defamation) Bill 2021, encouraging greater responsibility for social media companies and greater access to justice for those defamed on their sites. She formed a parliamentary friendship group aiming to better regulate content, which I'm proud to be part of, after she became the victim of vile defamatory posts last year. These posts, which were shared hundreds of times, accused her of terrible things, including on accounts associated with Mildura in Victoria, her own hometown. The perpetrator was ordered to pay damages of $875,000 after Justice Jacqueline Gleeson, then of the Federal Court and now of the High Court, labelled the claims as 'disgraceful and inexplicable'. The damages were awarded to the member for Mallee, her husband Philip, and the not-for-profit organisation, Zoe Support, which they established. Zoe Support helps more than 150 mothers aged from 13 to 25 and their children to access education and medical appointments each week. Justice Gleeson said that any effect the untrue posts had in deterring young women from seeking support was perhaps the most harmful aspect of the perpetrator's offences. Referring to social media at the time, the member for Mallee said: It's not an unknown world—but it is a bit of a scary world—where people can share whatever they like and it's only by going through legal cases that things can change. So the member for Mallee had to go to the legal expense and lawyer-up to defend her reputation. This is just not something that every Australian can afford to do. We might ask where the social media executives were while this was going on? Where was their accountability? Surely something needs to change, and it needs to change now, so I'm pleased to support this bill and the member for Mallee in taking the lead. Social media has extraordinary reach. Half of the 7.7 billion people on the planet have been signed up to social media applications. Social network platforms including Facebook and Instagram almost tripled their total user base in the last decade from 970 million in 2010 to over 4.48 billion users in July this year. The average social media user engages with an average of 6.6 different social media platforms. Social media sites provide people of all ages with a range of benefits and opportunities to empower and to express themselves. The communities built and the social interactions people form online can be invaluable for keeping in touch and sharing valuable information with people with shared interests. But we have an expression in our family about foreign water that could easily apply to social media platforms: they are good servants but bad masters. Unfortunately, it's increasingly apparent that social media can present enormous risks for individuals, communities, firms and our society as a whole. The dark side of social media includes cyberbullying, addiction, trolling, privacy abuse, fake news, disinformation and, of course, defamation. Defamation cases are notoriously hard to land, especially on social media. This bill does two important things. First, it enables the minister to set basic expectations of social media services regarding the hosting of material on social media platforms. In doing so, the minister must have regard to the importance of social media services, the value of truth and free debate, the harmfulness of defamation and the importance of preventing social media services from being used to facilitate unlawful conduct. The minister must also endeavour to consult the general public before making or varying determinations on the basic expectations of a social media service. The bill also serves to ensure that service providers are liable for defamatory material hosted on their platforms that is not removed in a reasonable time frame. The bill intends to address the lack of accountability of service providers when defamatory material is published on their sites. It also sets out a process whereby members of the public can make a complaint to the commissioner if they have reason to believe that they are being defamed by material posted on a social media service. The bill gives the commissioner the power to issue defamation notices to a service provider in circumstances where a complaint regarding defamatory material has been made. If the commissioner issued a defamation notice to a provider and the material is not removed within 48 hours, the service provider can be liable for defamation. So this bill shifts the needle from the perpetrators and the companies back to the ordinary citizen, and that's why the member for Mallee's bill is so important. Churchill said: a lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has put its pants on. How true this is in an age of social media. It's now time the social media platforms came to the table and took more responsibility. The difference between a lie and the truth on social media has become blurred, and it's up to the companies to put in place measures to protect people. If the companies do not, it's our job as legislators to put in place protections and regulations of the sort that are proposed in the member for Mallee's bill. This is a timely bill. It complements many of the initiatives that the government is already taking in relation to cleaning up the environment in which social media companies operate. I congratulate the member for Mallee on bringing this bill to the House and I commend it to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 The time allotted for this debate is expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Stop the Lies) Bill 2021 23

Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Stop the Lies) Bill 2021

First Reading 23 Second Reading 23 10:56 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I'm very proud to second this motion from the member for Warringah. Currently under Australian law, it's perfectly legal to lie in a political advertisement. This Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Disclosure of Political Donations) Bill 2021 will change that. This bill that I'm proud to second today bans inaccurate or misleading political advertisements during election campaigns. All Australians will know the type of ads I'm talking about; all the big political parties do it. As the member for Warringah has just talked about, whether it was the Liberal Party's totally baseless claims that Labor would introduce a death tax in the 2019 election, or the Labor Party's overblown 'mediscare' campaign against the Liberals in the 2016 election, Australians deserve better than to be bombarded with nonsense and lies during our elections and, with an election coming up this is an important reform. Right now, the political parties can say almost anything they like about their opponents with no requirement that they even tell the truth. In a public health crisis, when we have seen deliberate misinformation spread by various political actors, this becomes literally life-and-death stuff. Most Australians would be shocked to learn that it's perfectly legal for politicians to lie in their ads, to spin any old tale for the sake of a vote. People hate this stuff. People hate this kind of grubby, low, deceptive politics, and it is not what democracy is supposed to be about. Our governments should not be elected based on their skill in crafting compelling lies on social media. Australians deserve a political system that they can trust to tell them the truth. Eighty-seven per cent of the electorate agree that truth in political advertising laws should be passed. This bill brings political advertising up to the standards that businesses are held to and, importantly, the provisions of this bill have been tried and tested in legislation that's been in place in South Australia for over 20 years and was adopted by the ACT last year. This is a proven model and, frankly, it's quite revealing that no side of politics has seen fit to implement these laws at the federal level. Once again, it falls to the Independents to do the work of drafting sensible legislation that would help clean up our politics. I commend the member for Warringah for doing the work of bringing this bill to the parliament. Really and truly, we should all get behind and pass this bill. The SPEAKER 00APG The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order on the next sitting. Coal Prohibition (Quit Coal) Bill 2021 25

Coal Prohibition (Quit Coal) Bill 2021

First Reading 25 Second Reading 25 10:59 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That this bill be now read a second time. With our coal and gas exports, Australia is the world's third-biggest exporter of fossil-fuel pollution after Russia and Saudi Arabia, who are coincidentally our only allies in the upcoming climate negotiations in Glasgow. Four-fifths of the coal we extract, we export overseas. This is Australia's biggest contribution to the climate emergency that our carbon accounts exclude and our establishment political parties ignore. But, without a plan for coal, there is no plan to stop runaway global heating. Almost all of our exports go to Japan, China, and South Korea. All three have pledged net zero, which means the first thing they will target is pushing thermal coal out of their electricity system. Either we plan the transformation out of coal—on our own terms—or we let other countries make the decision for us, without warning. We are at a crossroads and right now we're staring down the wrong path. On the eve of the Glasgow climate summit, while the rest of the world are making plans to get out of coal and gas, here we have the Liberal and Labor parties backing more coal and gas—including the Northern Territory Labor government approving fracking in the Beetaloo basin just last week. The Prime Minister has said we shouldn't be afraid of coal, and just last week Labor's climate spokesperson said Labor won't stand in the way of more coal exports, pushing the same 'drug dealer's defence' that Tony Abbott did: if we don't sell it to you, you'll get it from somewhere else. Imagine if we'd said that about asbestos. But Labor and Liberal keep taking donations from the coal and gas corporations and keep selling a product that causes our country harm. Every extra molecule of coal, oil and gas that gets burned makes global warming worse and harms Australia. And every year we are seeing and feeling the impacts of the climate crisis more and more—the unprecedented bushfires in 2019, the floods along the east coast, droughts across parts of Western Australia and New South Wales, more extreme rainfall over the winter months impacting millions of Australians. Government agency ABARES has even concluded climate damage is already costing each Australian farmer $30,000 in lost income—all this with just 1.1 degrees of warming. We are on track for three to four degrees of warming unless we change course. If we don't have a plan to phase out coal then these extreme weather events, and their financial impacts, will get exponentially worse. We didn't have sympathy for tobacco and asbestos companies when their health risks were exposed, and the same should be for coal corporations who are profiting off destruction. In good news, the United States, Japan, Canada, South Korea, the United Kingdom, the European Union and 16 other major economies have answered the call to fight the climate crisis by committing to higher 2030 emissions reduction targets and developing plans to get out of coal. Last week the German coalition government talks, with the Greens in balance of power are working on bringing forward their plans to get out of coal by eight years, with a plan to exit from coal-fired power stations by 2030. But the Prime Minister is refusing to join the global community, leaving Australia with the least ambitious emissions target of any developed country in the world and no plans to get out of coal, and Labor is backing him with no 2030 targets and a plan to keep exporting coal into the 2050s. Whether it be the consequences in climate impacts in Australia, consequences for our diplomatic standing or consequences for our economy from the potential introduction of tariffs on our exports, a failure to get out of coal and gas will come at great cost to Australia and puts the health, wellbeing and economic prosperity of people on this land at risk. The International Energy Agency has mapped the pathway to not exceed 1½ degrees. It means not one new coal, oil or gas project can proceed. But Australia has 72 new coal projects and 44 new gas projects in the pipeline—the biggest and baddest of which is the Beetaloo basin, financed by public money committed by both the government and the opposition. It's unsustainable, it's embarrassing, and most of all it's dangerous and will cost our kids their future. The media has exposed that our own government has been trying to rewrite the facts in the next IPCC report on the need to phase out coal. The Prime Minister doesn't like the science, so he's trying to censor it. Which brings me back to this bill, the Coal Prohibition (Quit Coal) Bill 2021, which will do what the science demands of us. It will prohibit the mining and export of thermal coal after 2030. It's enough time for us to transition and it's enough time for us to look after the affected communities, but it is doing it within the time that, at a bare minimum, the climate and the science require. It would do it by introducing a permit system for the export of thermal coal—that is, coal for electricity—which would gradually wind down to zero over the next decade, providing companies, industry and workers with opportunities to attract new industries and jobs to their regions. It will immediately prohibit the establishment of a new coalmine or a new coal-fired power station. It will also prohibit the importation of thermal coal to Australia, with the exception of importation for research, heritage or display purposes. The limitations on new coal production would begin on 1 January 2022 as would the start of the phase-down in exports. We start in a few months time because the latest IPCC report, released this year, says that we're on track to hit 1.5 degrees of warming by 2035 if nothing changes. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for no new coal plants after 2021 and the phasing out of coal by 2030. We need to act now. That's what the science is telling us. As the largest coal exporter in the world, we have a key responsibility to act. The fact that we have made billions of dollars because of the coal we've exported so far heightens and sharpens this responsibility. Not only is it economically and technically possible to transition to 100 per cent renewables, but our sunshine, wind and highly skilled workforce give us the competitive edge to be the world's biggest clean energy exporter—a place where the abundance of cheap, clean power will allow us to bring manufacturing back and to process the iron ore, nickel, cobalt and lithium instead of shipping raw materials overseas. We can make green steel, batteries, electric vehicles and their components, turbines, solar cells—these are our opportunities to seize. Japan, along with South Korea, is asking us to help them decarbonise. The International Energy Agency said that pursuing net zero by 2050—which admittedly is too late, but it is still their target—will mean the clean-tech sector will be worth $1.2 trillion a year, bigger than today's oil market. It could be a lucrative industry that's worth billions of dollars for out country. This is our opportunity. Likewise, global heating is our problem to deal with, not our children's. Keeping coal in the ground and phasing out exports is the very first step. It's an unavoidable step. It is the only chance we have for a safe climate future. We need to do what we have done in other industries that we know don't have a sustainable future. It is not the fault of the workers or communities in coalmining towns or towns associated with coal-fired power stations. They have worked to help us keep the lights on and to power this country for decades. These communities should be in charge of their own future. They should be provided with the support, expertise and financial resources they need to transform and diversify their local economies in the way that they choose—so that their children can have stable, good-quality jobs in the new global economy. If we don't stop mining and burning coal we will be extinguished. If we don't start now, before the change is thrust upon us, we will see deep localised recessions and dismantled communities. This is a bill whose time has come. We need to join the rest of the world in making a plan to get out of coal and gas. We don't have a minute to lose. I would now like to read a statement from the seconder of this bill, the member for Clark, who is attending by virtual presence. It states: 'I'm pleased to second this bill which prohibits the establishment and expansion of coalmines and phases out the export and bans the import of thermal coal. Yes, this would be strong action and way beyond what the government and opposition have been be prepared to do. But it's exactly what's required if we're to genuinely put this country on a pathway to effectively respond to climate change. You've only got to look at the latest IPCC report to see we can't wait until 2050 to avoid irreversible climate change. Instead, 2030 is the key milestone and we must do everything in our power to achieve net zero by then. And to do so we must rapidly phase out reliance on and production of coal, gas and oil, and fast-track renewables. To do otherwise is to continue to trash our environment and lock in the most shocking intergenerational injustice in human history.' The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is the motion seconded? Dr Haines 282335 On behalf of the member for Clark, I second the motion. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 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. Privacy (COVID Check-in Data) Bill 2021 27

Privacy (COVID Check-in Data) Bill 2021

First Reading 27 Second Reading 27 11:10 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The national COVID plan underpinned by the Doherty Institute modelling is very clear that the ability to decrease public health restrictions such as lockdowns relies on high rates of vaccination and high-quality testing, tracing, isolation and quarantine measures. In other words, without effective contact tracing, high rates of vaccination will not be enough to move us toward a COVID-safe future. Central to successful contact tracing are the COVID check-in systems that also increasingly will enable premises and businesses to check the vaccination status of customers and visitors. Every state and territory in Australia has a check-in system in place to help manage the COVID-19 pandemic. People across the country are required to check-in when going about their daily lives to facilitate effective contact tracing and to help manage COVID-19 outbreaks. The Commonwealth parliament should support effective contact tracing and encourage the use of check-in systems. For these systems to work effectively, though, there needs to be a high degree of confidence by the public in the integrity and privacy of these systems. Most importantly, people need to know that data from the systems won't be used for a purpose other than ensuring public health. Disappointingly, personal data gathered from check-ins has been used in some jurisdictions by the police for reasons unrelated to COVID-19. And despite the country-wide use of check-ins, Australia does not have a nationally consistent approach to preventing law enforcement from accessing COVID-19 check-in data. Individual states and territories have different protections in place, with some allowing personal information to be accessed for unrelated law enforcement purposes via a warrant, while other states and territories have prohibited it. This inconsistency serves to undermine the effectiveness of COVID-19 check-ins as people cannot trust that their information will only be used for contact-tracing purposes. There is significant concern in the community and amongst legal and privacy advocates about this situation. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner has called for a nationally consistent approach to data, stating: The OAIC considers that personal information collected for contact-tracing purposes should not be used for other purposes such as law enforcement or even direct marketing. Allowing personal information to be used for other purposes may undermine the effective and efficient contact-tracing system, for example, by discouraging individuals from giving accurate information. A number of government MPs and senators, including Senator Paterson, the member for Goldstein, Senator Rennick and the member for Mackellar—and, I believe, also some from the opposition—have also expressed concerns about data gathered for health purposes being used by law enforcement and how it can undermine trust and contact tracing. Indeed, the opposition have also raised concerns, with the shadow Attorney-General calling for a nationally consistent approach. So I believe there is an opportunity for this parliament to come together to address this problem and quickly pass through this parliament a bill to protect everyone's data and privacy. This Greens' bill, the Privacy (COVID Check-in Data) Bill 2021, will introduce a ban on using COVID-19 check-in data for enforcement related activity purposes by preventing Commonwealth, state or territory authorities from using or providing COVID-19 check-in data for such law enforcement purposes. It will end the current situation of confusion, inconsistency and loopholes that enable law enforcement to access such data and that threaten to dissuade people from checking in as the country opens up in the weeks and months ahead. I will now outline the key elements of the bill. Section 4 sets out the objects of the bill, making clear that the main purpose of the bill is to support the effective management and control of COVID in Australia by providing stronger privacy protections for COVID check-in data to encourage public acceptance and use of COVID check-in apps and enable faster and more effective contact tracing. That object should be supported and supportable by everyone in this parliament. We want the COVID check-in apps to work and we want as many people as possible to use them. The bill defines, in section 5, a COVID check-in app as any mobile app that is made available or has been made available to the public by or on behalf of a Commonwealth, state or territory authority for the purpose of facilitating COVID contract tracing. This includes any mobile apps that were available before the commencement of the act. The bill defines COVID check-in data as data relating to a person that has been collected or generated through the operation of a COVID check-in app. Importantly, this includes data that has been collected or generated before the commencement of the act. To align with other legislation, de-identified and enforcement related activity have the same meanings as in the Privacy Act 1988. The Privacy Act 1988 defines de-identified as: … personal information is de-identified if the information is no longer about an identifiable individual or an individual who is reasonably identifiable That act defines enforcement related activity very broadly as: from prevention, investigation and prosecution of crimes or other breaches of the law including surveillance, imposition of fines and matters in relation to the courts. Finally, the bill defines a mobile app as an app that is designed for use on a mobile device. There may be other ways that people record check-in data across the country, but mobile devices are very popular, and it is beyond doubt that the Commonwealth has the power to regulate mobile devices. Section 6 is the crux of the bill and it provides very simply that a Commonwealth, state or territory authority must not use or disclose COVID check-in data for the purposes of enforcement related activity. This ban does not apply to a Commonwealth, state or territory authority using or disclosing data that the authority has obtained from a source that is not directly or indirectly from a COVID check-in app or de-identified statistical information. The Attorney-General has said this is a matter for the states, but this really is a proper field for the Commonwealth to regulate. As I said earlier, it is the Commonwealth that has driven the national plan, and the Information Commissioner at the federal level has called for national standards. But critically, as Australia opens up again, people will move between states and territories more freely. That is, indeed, a core feature of the national plan. As they do so, people should not worry about information being used differently depending on what state or territory they're in. The constitutional basis of this bill is based on the implied nationhood power, but also further support for the powers in the bill are found in section 51(v) of the Constitution which relates to telegraphic, telephonic and other like services and 51(ix) of the Constitution which relates to quarantine. The bill also has effect as if it were expressly confined to giving effect to Australia's obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and in particular article 17 of the covenant, in relation to COVID check-in data. So while much of the law enforcement activity is in the realm of the states, there is a firm constitutional basis for the parliament to pass this bill, put in place this ban and protect COVID check-in data so that everyone is guaranteed that when they scan that QR code it is being used for COVID purposes and nothing else. In the middle of this pandemic the Australian people, including though our laws and constitutions, have handed over and been willing to do significant things, including checking in wherever we go. Our Constitution also gives enormous powers to our law enforcement agencies. But in return for all of this people expect our law enforcement agencies to protect us and protect our rights. They also expect that these new practices that we've all agreed to, to scan in, won't be used or abused for other purposes. But too often we know that law enforcement agencies will try and access any information that they can and often overstep the mark, and that can harm the people that they're supposed to protect. That is all the more reason why law enforcement agencies should be subject to standards that are set in law, and high standards, including those in this bill. Most importantly this bill will ensure that people have confidence in using check-in apps, the importance of which will only grow as we try to keep COVID and future variants and viruses at bay. In my remaining time I'd like to read a statement from the member for Clark, who is seconding this bill: 'I'm pleased to second the member for Melbourne's bill, which prevents COVID-19 check-in data being used for law enforcement purposes. Check-in apps have obviously been an important tool for managing the pandemic around the country. Most Australians understand this and have been using these apps reliably and in good faith. But most Australians would also be appalled to see their check-in data being used for any other purpose, in particular law enforcement, because they never gave approval for their data to be used in such a way. Indeed, many people would not have used the check-in app if they had known their data would be used for any purpose other than responding to COVID-19. Australians have placed a lot of trust in governments over the pandemic and have sacrificed many personal liberties and freedoms, and that trust must be reciprocated.' That's the end of the statement from the member for Clark. In conclusion, we should pass this bill before we rise. I thank members of the crossbench who have expressed their support for this. I know this has support amongst many members of the government and the opposition, and I hope these protections are in place before we break for the end of the year. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Is the motion seconded? Dr Haines 282335 I second the motion, on behalf of the member for Clark, and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Unsolicited Political Communications Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 30

Unsolicited Political Communications Legislation Amendment Bill 2021

First Reading 30 Second Reading 30 11:21 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Australia is a country that embraces freedom of speech. A country that embraces freedom of political association. We respect the right of individuals to espouse their political views with few exceptions. Appropriately, we don't allow speech that is defamatory, is obscene, incites violence or hate, or is racially discriminatory. Implicit in these freedoms, however, is respect for the speaker and respect for the listener, the intended audience—'respect' in this context meaning that if a person does not ascribe to someone's political views they should not have to listen to them. In most circumstances we can choose not to listen. If a political party wishes to promote their policy on television or radio, we can change the channel or simply turn it off. We can flick the page of a newspaper with nothing more than a cursory glance and completely ignore the pamphlets that overflow our letterboxes, if we so choose. Electronic communication on the other hand is quite different. At its very core it intrudes our most personal devices, our mobile phones. A text message or a recorded phone message is immediate, directed and an invasion of privacy. And currently there is no escape. If a member of this House, a political party or candidate is prepared to buy a database they instantly have access to each and every voter they wish to target. What makes receiving political text messages particularly annoying is that individuals don't sign up for it. Unlike commercial messages, which are subject to the Spam Act, individuals have typically opted to have their details registered with a retailer or another commercial entity. As such there is tacit acceptance that they will be contacted by these entities. Importantly, they can opt out at any point as commercial messaging must contain an unsubscribe feature. This is not the case for political text messages. Do people really care about this? The answer is an emphatic yes. In recent months my electorate office has received many calls from constituents who are angry at receiving multiple text messages from a member in this chamber. They have wanted answers to questions like: Why are they receiving these texts? How did the sender get their details? They didn't sign up to receive political texts and they wanted to know how they could stop receiving them. My staff, bearing the brunt of these calls, had to advise constituents that, despite these annoying intrusions into their lives, the texts were legal. This was met with complete astonishment and respectful demands that something be done about it. This anger is not restricted to my electorate either. Australians across the country have voiced their concerns; they do not like receiving political texts. They have simply had enough. This is evidenced by the more than 4,000 complaints made to the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) in 2021 alone. However, ACMA is completely powerless to act on the thousands of complaints because political messages are exempt from the laws that prohibit unsolicited communications. Instead, political parties, sitting members and candidates are free to harass Australians with a bombardment of unwanted messages. This is unfair, and I seek the support of this House to make this stop. This bill gives power back to Australians. It amends the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 and the Spam Act 2003 with the express purpose to give consumers more control over what they receive from political parties and individual politicians. At the very essence of the bill, it requires the sending party to provide an unsubscribe option, an opt-out feature for the receiver, just like commercial entities do. It strikes a fair balance between the rights of political parties, Independents and candidates to freely communicate with voters on political and electoral matters and the rights of consumers to decide which political messages they wish to receive. The bill does not deny political freedoms or the rights to communicate one's political beliefs. It does not deny political parties, politicians or candidates the right to campaign or communicate their political ideology. Rather, it rightfully gives everyday Australians the power to stop receiving persistent and unwanted calls and texts. The bill also requires actors in voice calls featuring electoral material to be identified, to make it clear to those listening that the actors are performing a part, so that actors posing as a nurse, a teacher or a small-business owner for example, are not mistaken for 'real' people. It provides honesty and transparency, which is badly needed in this place. My Centre Alliance colleague, Stirling Griff, introduced a similar bill in the other place back in 2019. The original bill was ultimately rejected by the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee because the proposed changes would have unduly affected the charity sector. This bill addresses these concerns by restricting amendments to political communications only. The previous charities clauses are not present in this bill, leaving no justification for this bill to be rejected by the House. The implied freedom of political communication, protected by our Constitution, is not impinged by this bill. As such, I say to all members in this place: if you truly respect the opinions and rights of Australians, you will support this bill. Thank you. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 Order! Is the motion seconded? 11:27 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I'm proud to second this bill, and I thank the member for Mayo for this very important legislation. The election hasn't even been called, and Australians have started preparing to be bombarded with intrusive and unwonted political text messages pinging our phones at all hours of night and day. Already you can hear a collective groan go up around the nation as Australians are spammed by the millions, interrupting family moments, our work or our downtime. Indeed, the last time I got a spam message was in this very chamber, and at least, when I was in the same room as the member who sent it to me, I could approach him and say, 'Not just now.' If only every other Australian could say the same, but unfortunately for them, there's nothing they can do. The Australian Communications and Media Authority has received 4,000 complaints about unsolicited texts this year, and it can't act on even a single one, and boy, are my constituents furious. The member for Mayo's bill introduces a simple amendment to the Spam Act to require all electronic messages containing electoral matter to include an unsubscribe or opt-out option. I was frankly shocked to learn that this wasn't already required. But it's no accident that politicians and political parties have a blanket carve-out from spam rules. It's by design. In many cases, if a business or individual centre spam message like this, they could be prosecuted—but not us. When the United Australia Party first started sending texts, both the coalition and Labor were quick to criticise, but I would ask: where are you now? This chamber is practically empty of government and opposition MPs. There's lots of big talk about protecting our democracy, but, when it comes to legislating, they are nowhere to be found, and I think I know why. Our Constitution has an implied right of political freedom, which recognises that politicians need to communicate with their constituents. This is very important, but in every other form of communication you have a choice: you can switch the channel, you can close the browser or you can walk out of the room. With unsolicited texts, you don't get a say. The member for Mayo's bill strikes the right balance between legitimate political contact and the right to say, 'No, thank you,' and I am very pleased to support her on this bill. It's what my constituents have asked me to do, it's what the Australian public are calling for, and I think it's something we could all get behind if we were serious about this. Now is the right time to clean up this aberration before the onslaught of our next election. I commend the member for Mayo for this piece of legislation, and I encourage every member of this House to get behind it and pass this bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 203092 There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Aged Care Amendment (Making Aged Care Fees Fairer) Bill 2021 31

Aged Care Amendment (Making Aged Care Fees Fairer) Bill 2021

First Reading 31 Second Reading 31 11:31 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety and recently the National Ageing Research Institute (NARI) have confirmed what we already know—that is, as we age, most Australians want to stay in our homes for as long as we can. Not only would most older Australians prefer to stay in their own homes for as long as they can possibly do so, with the appropriate supports and services, but the royal commission also identified that this is the most cost-effective way to provide support. I could not agree more that the aged-care system needs to be reviewed and rebuilt with the greatest haste possible. This needs to be done in engagement with older Australians about the care that they need and want, moving away from the 'four sizes fit all' approach to build individual support for individual needs. I appreciate the government's stated intention to put in place a new Aged Care Act by 2023. However, in the meantime in representing our communities we need to do all that we can to positively influence this reform process and improve the system that is facing Australian seniors and their families, today. There are many regions in my electorate of Mayo where the median age is over 58 years, and where half the community is aged over 65 years. As a result of hearing the concerns of many of my constituents regarding access to and the costs of aged care at home, I surveyed 15,000 Mayo residents aged 75 years or older regarding their experiences of home care under My Aged Care. Beyond reporting lengthy waiting lists, half of those respondents with packages advised me that they are unhappy with or unclear about the administration and management fees charged under their home-care packages. Half of those with packages reported that there had been no change in their package over time, yet many were paying the same hefty management fees on their static package, month after month. The Commonwealth spent more than $23 billion on aged care this financial year and yet there is still too little transparency about how these taxpayer funds are spent by providers. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety received evidence that the average amount of support for an older Australian on a $52,000-per-annum level 4 home-care package was just eight hours and 45 minutes each week. That is the highest level of home care a person can access. Too many receive far less, particularly in regional areas. This is not because aged-care workers are getting overpaid, or even paid fairly. As I have discussed on several occasions in this place, we need to address the fact that the workers providing valued care to our older Australians are unjustly being paid up to 25 per cent less than workers in the disability sector. I heard from Margaret earlier this year, who reported that after she refused provider charges of $800 per month to manage four hours of care per week, she was offered a private arrangement at approximately $60 per hour by the provider, who planned to pay her carers only $28 an hour. She now engages a private cleaner at $30 per hour. Margaret is managing this herself because of her concerns that older Australians are being thoroughly taken advantage of, and that this is preventing others from accessing the care they need. Another elderly woman has contacted me who says that she needs far more care than she currently receives. She has managed to secure a level 2 package worth $1,270 per month, $575 of which is taken out in administration and management fees. This represents nearly half of her package which does not directly contribute to the much-needed care that she deserves. They are sadly not isolated examples. As one constituent explained: The problem we often wonder (is) how they arrive with their exorbitant charges and on top of that the costs they add to the services they provide. Home Care providers already have a legislative responsibility to keep package management fees and business costs to 'reasonable' amounts. Clearly some Home Care providers believe that taking 45 per cent of a person's package is reasonable. My community and I beg to differ. If passed, this bill will require providers to identify the amount of a participant's home-care fees which is directly attributable to the costs of administering and managing the provision of aged care in the home. Other components may not be inflated or padded with additional administration and management charges. Fees for administration and management will be capped at 25 per cent of lower-level home-care packages, and 20 per cent of higher-level packages. That is reasonable. The bill also prohibits approved providers charging 'exit' fees, which in mid-2019 averaged $225 for a published maximum exit amount when a recipient of home care wished to leave a home-care service and perhaps go to another one. This will give older Australians greater autonomy to exercise their choice of provider based upon their satisfaction with the services, and the fees charged for their care. This bill also requires providers to give prospective care recipients a list setting out comparable home-care fees for at least five approved providers of the care sought, in the area in which the recipient is seeking care. If there are fewer than five such providers of the care sought in that area, a list of fees must be provided for all approved providers for delivering that service. The bill simply seeks to ensure that home-care funding is used to provide more hours of actual care for older Australians, and fairer wages for aged-care workers, rather than being siphoned off by providers for other purposes. I therefore commend the Aged Care Amendment (Making Aged Care Fees Fairer) Bill 2021 to the House, and I would urge the government and the opposition: let's move on this issue soon. We can't leave it for a new act in the next parliament. People are suffering today. Let us address this issue urgently. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN Is the motion seconded? 11:39 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I second the motion. The member for Mayo is a crusader for a fairer aged-care system. She represents one of our oldest electorates and, during her last five years in this place, she has fought tirelessly for senior Australians. Before the aged-care royal commission exposed the system's failings in black and white, the member for Mayo shone a light on what people chose to ignore and she urged the government to do better. Today is the next step in her fight, with the making aged-care fairer bill. Ageing at home is the clear preference of older Australians. Demand for homecare packages is set to surge, as the baby boomer generation ages. Yet, astoundingly, up to 45 to 50 per cent of the costs of homecare packages can go to management and administration fees. There's no way to tell if the reasonable fees that providers are allowed to charge bear any relationship to the actual cost involved. This bill will ensure that these fees are directly attributable to the costs to administer or manage the provision of home care to the recipient. This seeks to prevent price gouging and give older people and their families an informed choice and greater autonomy about their home care and what they pay for that care. The royal commission reported that the most common concern among homecare respondents to a survey was finance and administration, including value for money and transparency around fees and charges. High management fees could be justifiable if they went towards better wages for our aged-care workers, but, sadly, this is not the case. Our aged-care workforce is chronically underpaid and undervalued. The government's response to high management fees is to make pricing more transparent and let competition put downward pressure on the fees. Yes, the royal commission reported that, despite increased pricing transparency measures, care management fees had increased as a proportion of all fees, so it does not seem to be working. It's not simply about information scarcity or consumer choice. I represent hundreds of constituents in rural and regional areas who simply do not have a choice of providers. There is one provider, and you take whatever they offer you, including—possibly—exorbitant fees, because it's better than nothing; you can't shop around. We need regulation like this, so we know that older Australians and their families aren't getting ripped off. Over 55,000 people are still waiting for a homecare package. When their wait is over, let's make sure they get value for money and a high-quality service, so that they can age safely and happily in their home. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN 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. Protecting Pensioners from the Cashless Debit Card Bill 2021 33

Protecting Pensioners from the Cashless Debit Card Bill 2021

First Reading 33 Second Reading 33 11:02 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Pensioners have a right to control how they spend their own money without the government and a private company controlling where they can shop and what they can buy, so I'm proud to introduce this bill protecting pensioners from the cashless debit card. It implements Labor's policy to scrap the government's cruel scheme, liberating thousands of Australians, including disability pensioners, carers and others already on this card, and protecting all pensioners from being forced onto the card. Eighty per cent of a person's payment is put on this privatised card and a private company, Indue, controls when, where and how people can spend their own money. This card is dehumanising, degrading and results in horrible situations. One woman was forced to beg Indue for permission to buy a bra that fitted her from a shop that wasn't on the approved list. She was forced to send in photos. This bill stops this government's privatisation of social security dead in its tracks. The Morrison government has already wasted over $70 million dollars on this private company, Indue. That's $5,200 per card, more than many part-pensioners get in an entire year. This has been a cash bonanza for Indue, yet the government wants to expand it. I challenge the government to stop misleading people and set the record straight about their plans. If they really don't want a national rollout, then they will vote for this bill. They can't be trusted. They said the card was just a trial, but then the minister introduced legislation to make the card permanent before she'd even received the independent review, giving away their real game. As usual, the government is now literally pretending that they haven't said the things that came out of their own mouths. The Prime Minister forgets that TV cameras actually record things. The headline on Sky News clearly said that the Prime Minister 'is eyeing a national rollout of the cashless debit card'. The minister has said: We are seeking to put all income management onto the universal platform which is the cashless debit card. Last year the government introduced legislation into this parliament to give the minister the power to force all age pensioners onto the card. Australians are not stupid. Ask yourself: why would you introduce legislation to force pensioners onto the card if that's not what you wanted to do? There are already pensioners who've been forced onto the card. The Prime Minister said numerous times that he considers 'The pension is a welfare payment for those who really, really need it.' He's not alone. His close mates Senator Pauline Hanson and Clive Palmer agree. Senator Hanson said welfare recipients have 'lost their right' to decide how to spend their money. If the Prime Minister wins the next election, pensioners will be forced onto this card and they won't have enough cash to buy cheap food from the local fresh food market or second-hand goods off the internet or meals at the RSLs and local service clubs. It'll hurt small businesses and farmers' markets. They won't have enough cash to give to the grandkids. These are the stories we've heard from people already on the card. The 7.30 Report spoke to a single mum who was forced onto the card who didn't have enough gold coins to make the donation to get into the school fete. The bill also deals with the government's addiction to secrecy. It will force the minister to come clean, to release the secret contract with the private company Indue. It is the only social services contract that the government has not released. The rest are on their website, but this one is secret. The Senate demanded last week that the minister table the contract on Friday, and she is still refusing. It will also force the minister to release the secret documents about their plans to expand the scheme. I've tried to get them through freedom of information laws, and the government refuses. They said, two weeks ago, 'Well, there are simply too many documents to process.' Australians deserve to know what this secret technology working group is actually doing. It's chaired by a government senator; it includes the big banks, Australia Post and the supermarkets; and it's trying to work out product-level blocking. That is code for a private company, Indue, being able to control what brands and what sizes of goods in what shops people can buy with their own money. The minister has admitted—again, on the record, on the television—" The reason we haven't done it in the major cities is because we need to deal with the technology issue, which we are now close to resolving. This bill is sensible—it's not radical—and provides for transition. It forces the minister to prepare a jobs and services plan for each affected community by the end of January when the card ends. Finally, the question is: will this bill pass? I believe it will pass if the government allows a vote. Some Liberal MPs don't support the scheme. The member for Bass spoke powerfully in this chamber against the bill to expand the trials but was bullied by the Prime Minister into voting for it. Liberal MPs always say one thing in their electorates and do another thing here in Canberra. The member for Bass and others who privately don't like the card need to put their money where their mouth is and cross the floor to allow a vote. If the government is not stopped, the consequences are horrendous—millions of Australians will be forced onto this privatised scheme, expanding the suffering and indignity. If the bill doesn't pass before the elections, then we know the government's intentions are clear and the battlelines are drawn. Liberals want to expand their scheme, but a Labor government will fight privatisation and protect pensioners by scrapping this nasty, cruel cashless pension card scheme, once and for all. I invite the member for Richmond to make some remarks in seconding the bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN Is the motion seconded? I call the member for Richmond. 11:48 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond I'm very proud to be seconding this bill and protecting pensioners from the cashless debit card, because this bill will finally end the Morrison government's cruel, heartless and failed cashless debit card. It will end it for those currently on the card, and it will stop the Liberals and Nationals from rolling it out across the country to others on income support payments and to those on the age pension. We, in Labor, stand by those on those trial sites who have currently been forced on to the card, and we will keep fighting to stop the Morrison government from forcing more people onto it. We know it's the Morrison government's plan to expand it, because they have listed the age pension in the legislation and they keep on talking about making it universal. The minister responsible, Senator Ruston, said that the card should have a more universal platform. The Prime Minister himself said the card is 'commending itself for wider application'. The communications minister said, 'Our Liberal-National government is committed to the cashless debit card.' And the member for Hinkler said, 'I think it's now time to take the evidence on board and roll it out across the country.' Well, we don't agree with you. In contrast, we've made it very clear that, if elected, Labor will scrap this card, because it does not work and it imposes harsh measures on the thousands who've been forced onto it against their will. But we know that, if the Morrison government get their way, they will expand it out across the country. We already know there are 14 age pensioners who've been forced onto it, bringing the total number of age pensioners to 20. This is a card where 80 per cent of your income is controlled by the government. They get to choose where and when you spend your money. And, of course, in their ongoing outsourcing of welfare, they have this scheme run by a private company, Indue—no accountability, no transparency. We also know the Morrison government is working with the banks. They've got a technology working group specifically designed to roll out the cashless debit card. So many people have contacted us detailing how being forced onto this card has impacted their lives. The usage of the card is very restricted. The card is often declined. People can't buy food or basic groceries. They can't pay their rent. They're forced into bankruptcy. They can't make car repayments. They can't buy second-hand clothes because they can't access cash to buy them. It is absolutely devastating. Many people have had their dignity taken away, like Bianca, who has to wear plus-sized bras. She can only afford to buy this specific bra on eBay, which is a blocked merchant under this scheme. Indue insisted that she first send a photo of the bra, then get permission to buy it and then show proof of purchase. That is appalling. And Jocelyn, who is 65 years old and on a disability pension, was forced onto the cashless welfare card just because of where she lives. I'd like to acknowledge all those individuals and groups across the country who have been fighting against this card for years. We are with you. We are with you in fighting the Morrison government's plan to expand the card. We know they want to expand it to age pensioners, who can then say goodbye to cheap food and drinks at their local club, having cash to give the grandkids, being able to access cash to go to the local op shop or garage sale. That's what they're going to take from our age pensioners, the people who built this nation. This is insulting, it's demeaning and it is downright wrong. This is why this bill must be supported. If the Liberals and Nationals refuse to vote on this bill in parliament, then we'll fight this issue every day up until the next election. The choice is very clear. The Liberals and Nationals want to expand the cashless debit card, and Labor is committed to scrapping it once and for all. We're committed to that because Labor is on your side. We will stand up and fight for you every day. I commend the bill to the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order for the next sitting. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 35 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People 35 11:52 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler I move: That this House: (1) notes that 29 November 2021 is the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People as declared by the United Nations in 1977; (2) recognises the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including their right to self determination and a future built on peace, dignity, justice and security; (3) acknowledges the obstacles to the ongoing peace process, particularly the need for urgent action on issues such as settlements, Jerusalem, the Gaza blockade and the humanitarian situation in the occupied Palestinian territories; (4) further recognises that the ongoing humanitarian situation in Palestine is far-reaching, with many in the Australian community affected by this ongoing conflict; and (5) calls on the Government to ensure Australia is working constructively to support security and human rights in Palestine, in advance of a just and enduring two-state solution in the Middle East. As we approach 29 November, I take the opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to the Palestinian people and stand united in their struggle for self-determination. When the Oslo agreements were drafted in 1993, they were intended to give the Palestinian people autonomy. However, 28 years later the military occupation continues to control the lives of Palestinians and their access to the basic necessities of life, including the vital water supply. Under the Oslo agreements, Israel retains exclusive control over almost all the water resources. The agreements allocate 80 per cent of the mountain aquifer water to Israeli use and 20 per cent to the Palestinians. Apart from the human rights implications that arise, it is quite concerning given that over the last 28 years the Palestinian population of the occupied West Bank has nearly doubled. Due to these restrictions, the Palestinian authority is forced to purchase significant water supply from Mekorot, Israel's national water company. This issue is further complicated by the very poor Palestinian water pipelines, which mean that about a third of the water supply, I am advised, is being lost to leakage. The water shortage in the West Bank is acute in summer and Mekorot restricts the water supplies for the higher demands of the Israeli settlements. As a result, the average water consumption for all Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza falls well behind the World Health Organization's recommended minimum levels. Access to necessities such as water is an inalienable human right and, unfortunately, these rights are not being realised due to military occupation. Clearly this is inhumane and unjust. We must work towards affording self-determination to the Palestinian people, including a future that's based on peace, dignity, justice and security. I acknowledge there are many obstacles in the ongoing peace process, particularly the need for urgent action in respect to settlements, Jerusalem, the Gaza blockade and the humanitarian situation in the occupied territories. I believe it falls to countries like Australia, who believe in the dignity of all people, to become more engaged in addressing the need for a tangible process towards the creation of the Palestinian state while ensuring respect and security for a Jewish homeland. I genuinely accept the right of the Jewish state to exist and for it to be able to defend the rights and freedoms of its people. However, I firmly believe the future of the Jewish state and, indeed, the region depends on Israel's ability to live in peace with its neighbours, including a Palestinian state. On this note, I call on the government to ensure that Australia's working constructively to support security and the human rights of Palestinians, including the unequivocal commitment to adjust an enduring two-state solution consistent with international law. While slightly digressing, I'd also take this opportunity to reiterate my concerns about Mohammed El Halabi, the former director of World Vision Australia in Gaza and the West Bank. Mr El Halabi has been charged on allegations of funnelling $50 million of World Vision aid money to a terrorist group, Hamas. Although investigations have been conducted by the Department of Foreign Affairs, independent auditors as well as World Vision itself, they have all failed to show any evidence that money was actually diverted, Mr El Halabi remains in prison. He's been severely restricted in his legal defence throughout his four-year ordeal, depriving him of a fair trial, and has been forced to attend over 150 court appearances without any substantial evidence to support the allegations against him. I have been in contact with Mr El Halabi's distressed father on a number of occasions now regarding his son's plight and, accordingly, I use this opportunity to renew any call for the international community to continue to place pressure on Israel to finalise Mr El Halabi's trial without further delay. I look further to a future where Israel and Palestine can coexist in peace and harmony and I echo the views of Pope Benedict—let the two-state solution become a reality, not remain a dream. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN Is there a seconder? 11:58 Mr SHARMA 274506 Wentworth I second the motion and I thank the member for Fowler for moving this on International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People; indeed, much of what he said I agree with, particularly his support for the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. I, like the Australian government and many Australians, support the notion of two states—the two peoples living alongside one another peacefully and in coexistence. Unfortunately, a peace process, one that has been engaged over many years, has not led to the establishment of a Palestinian state to date. As the member for Fowler articulated, there have been numerous obstacles. If this were easy, of course, it would have been done by now, so we shouldn't underestimate the difficulties that are involved. My enduring lesson from my time as the Australian Ambassador to Israel is that there are two things that need to happen, effectively, for peace to come about. Firstly, Israel will only make the necessary territorial concessions that are needed for peace once its security is assured. Secondly, Palestinians will only make the necessary identity concessions once the Palestinians are reconciled to Israel's existence. Both of those elements are missing to date, and have been missing throughout the process, whether it was the UN partition plan of 1947 and 1948, which was rejected; or the three noes of the Khartoum summit, which rejected Israel's right to exist; or the failure of the Camp David process, the Indianapolis process or even the John Kerry-led process launched during the Obama administration—(Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN 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. MOTIONS 37 MOTIONS Member For Pearce 37 12:00 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes:    (a) last week, the Morrison-Joyce government voted down a privileges motion given precedence by the Speaker for the first time since Federation;    (b) media reports that "Liberal backbenchers were completely horrified" by that vote, which protected the Member for Pearce from having to disclose the sources of donations;    (c) this renders the Register of Members' Interests completely meaningless; and    (d) those same backbenchers now have the chance to put things right and restore basic standards of transparency and integrity to this Parliament; (2) provides leave for the Manager of Opposition Business to once again move a motion to refer the Member for Pearce to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests. Leave not granted. Mr BURKE DYW I move: That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business from moving the following motion immediately: (1) notes:    (a) last week, the Morrison-Joyce government voted down a privileges motion given precedence by the Speaker for the first time since Federation;    (b) media reports that "Liberal backbenchers were completely horrified" by that vote, which protected the Member for Pearce from having to disclose the sources of donations;    (c) this renders the Register of Members' Interests completely meaningless; and    (d) those same backbenchers now have the chance to put things right and restore basic standards of transparency and integrity to this Parliament; (2) provides leave for the Manager of Opposition Business to once again move a motion to refer the Member for Pearce to the Committee of Privileges and Members' Interests. It's no good telling the media privately that you think last week's vote was a terrible thing if you were part of that vote. Every one of those members who wants to go off to the media or to their electorate and claim it was nothing to do with them should change their vote today. 12:02 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the Manager of Opposition Business be no further heard.    

The House divided. [12:07]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

55 AYES Alexander, J. G. Allen, K. J. Andrews, K. J. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Buchholz, S. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Connelly, V. G. Coulton, M. M. Drum, D. K. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Falinski, J. G. Fletcher, P. W. Frydenberg, J. A. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Hamilton, G. R. Hammond, C. M. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Hunt, G. A. Joyce, B. T. G. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Martin, F. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. Morton, B O'Dowd, K. D. Pasin, A. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Sharma, D. N. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tudge, A. E. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Wicks, L. E. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Wyatt, K. G. Zimmerman, T. M. 52 NOES Albanese, A. N. Bandt, A. P. Bird, S. L. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Dick, D. M. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fitzgibbon, J. A. Freelander, M. R. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Haines, H. M. Hayes, C. P. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Leigh, A. K. Marles, R. D. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. O'Connor, B. P. J. Owens, J. A. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Smith, D. P. B. Snowdon, W. E. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

12:10 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 12:10 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs I second the motion. This government has opened the door to corruption and opened the door to bribery of— 12:10 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member for Isaacs be no further heard.    

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

 55 AYES Alexander, J. G. Allen, K. J. Andrews, K. J. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Buchholz, S. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Connelly, V. G. Coulton, M. M. Drum, D. K. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Falinski, J. G. Fletcher, P. W. Frydenberg, J. A. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Hamilton, G. R. Hammond, C. M. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Hunt, G. A. Joyce, B. T. G. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Martin, F. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. Morton, B O'Dowd, K. D. Pasin, A. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Sharma, D. N. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tudge, A. E. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Wicks, L. E. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Wyatt, K. G. Zimmerman, T. M. 52 NOES Albanese, A. N. Bandt, A. P. Bird, S. L. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Dick, D. M. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fitzgibbon, J. A. Freelander, M. R. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Haines, H. M. Hayes, C. P. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Leigh, A. K. Marles, R. D. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. O'Connor, B. P. J. Owens, J. A. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Smith, D. P. B. Snowdon, W. E. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 12:14 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the Manager of Opposition Business be disagreed to.    

The House divided. [12:14]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 55 AYES Alexander, J. G. Allen, K. J. Andrews, K. J. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Buchholz, S. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Connelly, V. G. Coulton, M. M. Drum, D. K. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Falinski, J. G. Fletcher, P. W. Frydenberg, J. A. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Hamilton, G. R. Hammond, C. M. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Hunt, G. A. Joyce, B. T. G. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Martin, F. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. Morton, B O'Dowd, K. D. Pasin, A. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Sharma, D. N. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tudge, A. E. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Wicks, L. E. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Wyatt, K. G. Zimmerman, T. M. 52 NOES Albanese, A. N. Bandt, A. P. Bird, S. L. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Dick, D. M. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fitzgibbon, J. A. Freelander, M. R. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Haines, H. M. Hayes, C. P. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Leigh, A. K. Marles, R. D. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. O'Connor, B. P. J. Owens, J. A. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Smith, D. P. B. Snowdon, W. E. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 BILLS 42 BILLS Customs Amendment (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2021, Customs Tariff Amendment (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2021, Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response—Better Advice) Bill 2021 42

Customs Amendment (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2021

Customs Tariff Amendment (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement Implementation) Bill 2021

Financial Sector Reform (Hayne Royal Commission Response—Better Advice) Bill 2021

Returned from Senate 42 COMMITTEES 42 COMMITTEES Australia's Family Law System Joint Select Committee, Implementation of the National Redress Scheme Joint Select Committee, National Broadband Network Joint Committee, Road Safety Joint Select Committee, Public Works Joint Committee 42 Membership 42 12:16 The DEPUTY SPEAKER HWN The Speaker has received messages from the Senate informing the House that Senator Grogan had been appointed a participating member of the following committees: Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System; Joint Select Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme; Joint Standing Committee on the National Broadband Network; and Joint Select Committee on Road Safety; and that Senator Sheldon had been appointed a member of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works. Public Accounts and Audit Committee, Employment, Education and Training Committee, Industry, Innovation, Science and Resources Committee, Economics Committee, Environment and Energy Committee 42 Membership 42 12:17 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright On behalf of the Leader of the House, I move: That: (1) Ms Flint be appointed a member of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit; (2) Mr Irons be appointed a member of the Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Training and the Standing Committee on Industry, Innovation, Science and Resources; (3) Mr Hamilton be appointed a member of the Standing Committee on Economics; and (4) Mr Alexander be appointed a member of the Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy. Question agreed to. BILLS 43 BILLS Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 43 Second Reading 43 12:18 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright I present the explanatory memorandum to the bill, and I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the bill is to protect sponsorship and licensing revenue from the International Cricket Council, ICC, Men's T20 World Cup 2022 from being undermined by ambush marketing. Ambush marketing is the unauthorised commercial use of event indicia (or expressions) and images. This will be achieved by including the T20 World Cup as a recognised major sporting event under the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Act 2014 (the act). The bill also removes a schedule relating to two historical sporting events that will no longer provide protections under the act, being the Asian Football Confederation, AFC, Cup 2015 and the ICC World Cup 2015. The bill is consistent with the approach the Australian government took when it legislated to protect the indicia and images for the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games, the 2015 AFC Asian Cup, the 2015 Cricket World Cup, the Melbourne 2006 Commonwealth Games and the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games. It also meets a commitment by the Australian government to provide such intellectual property rights protection for the T20 world cup. The hosting of the T20 world cup in Australia provides a unique opportunity to showcase our country to the world from a tourism, trade and event delivery perspective. It will further strengthen Australia's reputation as a world-class host of major international sporting events, with the Australian government playing a critical role in facilitating the appropriate environment that makes such success possible. The T20 world cup will see the world's 10 best women's teams and 16 best men's teams come to Australia to play 20/20 cricket, with potential broadcast and digital audiences reaching in excess of 1.5 billion people from more than 200 countries worldwide. These T20 world cup teams will represent the pinnacle of international sporting competition and include some of the world's most talented male and female cricketers. The women's T20 world cup tournament will take place in February to March of 2022, with the men's T20 world cup tournament scheduled for October-November in the same year. For the owners and organisers of the T20 world cup, this international profile provides the opportunity to showcase the sport of cricket, to build a legacy and to attract commercial partners that will invest in the event and cricket into the future. Event owners and organisers rely heavily on revenue generated by television rights, ticket sales, sponsorship and licensing to ensure their event can be delivered and continues to be an attractive and viable financial proposition to future host countries. It is this profile and these commercial realities that necessitate the sorts of protections proposed for the T20 world cup in this bill. Major events have long been targets of those that would seek to create an impression of association with the event in order to achieve commercial gain without having purchased the rights and therefore invested in the sport, to claim that association. This act, known as 'ambush marketing by association', has the capacity to diminish the value of sponsorship, reduce incentives for organisations to enter into commercial arrangements with events and reduce the overall event revenue. In turn, this has the ability to increase the financial impact on government to support such events. The bill will protect the use of a range of expressions associated with the T20 world cup from ambush marketing and unlicensed commercial use in the lead-up to, during and in the immediate aftermath of each tournament. In addition to protecting specific event related terminology, the bill also provides protection to certain images that in the circumstances of their presentation suggest, or are likely to suggest, a connection with the T20 world cup. These images may be either visual or aural representations. While it is important to protect T20 world cup sponsors from ambush marketing, the rights of the community to freedom of expression must also be respected, particularly in relation to words that have passed into common usage. A pragmatic approach has been taken with generic words and references excluded from the list of protected expressions. It must also be emphasised that restrictions on the usage of T20 world cup indicia and images will apply only to their unlicensed commercial use. A number of exceptions will exist in relation to the T20 world cup allowing for: the continued operation of rights and liabilities under the Trade Marks Act 1995, the Design Act 2003 and the Copyright Act 1968; the provision of information, criticism and review of the T20 world cup, such as in newspapers, magazines and broadcasts; use of the protected indicia and images for the reasonable needs of sporting bodies in relation to fundraising and promotion; and communities and businesses to engage in city dressing and festival promotions supporting the T20 world cup in non-commercial ways. In line with the Australian government's deregulation agenda, the bill is not intended to increase the burden on business or affect their everyday operations. The bill fully protects the rights of the existing holders to use T20 World Cup indicia and images to carry out their business functions. The T20 World Cup schedule proposed in the bill will cease to have effect as of 30 November 2021, approximately one year after the completion of the T20 World Cup. This is consistent with other major sporting events protected by the act. (Quorum formed) 12:28 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I very proudly rise to speak on the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021, which does two things: it amends the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Act 2014 and it amends the Sport Integrity Australia Act 2020. Labor supports this bill, which was introduced in the Senate on 16 June this year. I'll deal with those two aspects, the two aims of the bill, separately. The Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill provides protection for major sporting events against ambush marketing. In simple terms, 'ambush marketing' describes unauthorised businesses associating their names, brands, products or services with a major sporting event. 'Unauthorised' means businesses that do not have commercial rights and are not licensed sponsors or corporate partners, for example. The act needs to be updated because it currently includes schedules for the 2018 Gold Coast Commonwealth Games—a great event which is now in the past—and the postponed ICC T20 World Cup 2020. The bill amends the act to remove references to these two events. It also adds the FIFA 2023 women's World Cup and the rescheduled ICC T20 World Cup, which is now due to be held in 2022. Labor was proudly first to publicly express our support for Australia's bid to host the FIFA 2023 women's world cup, which was of course successful. Hosting the 2023 FIFA women's World Cup is a huge opportunity for Australia. I commend Football Australia on its goal of reaching gender parity in grassroots participation by 2027, which will no doubt be aided by a World Cup on home soil, although I would make the point that we desperately need more facilities for the increased female participation in football, particularly in my electorate, where we are seeing female players having to get changed in cars or out the back in the bush. It's a most unwelcoming state of affairs. While we are talking about major sporting events, it would be remiss of me not to mention the wonderful news in July that Australia will host its third Olympic Games, in 2032. Congratulations to Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk and her government, the council of south-east Queensland mayors, the Australian Olympic Committee, the federal government and everyone else who was involved in Brisbane's successful bid. In July and August, the efforts and achievements of the Australian Olympic and Paralympic teams in Tokyo lifted the spirits of millions of Australians in lockdown. They amazed and entertained us and did us all proud. I know I'm not alone in already being excited about the opportunity for our athletes to represent Australia in front of huge crowds in 2032. COVID-19 forced the postponement of the ICC men's T20 cricket World Cup, which was meant to be held last year but is now scheduled for 2022. I hope Australia's vaccination rollout is advanced enough by then that the competition can be run smoothly, because postponements and cancellations hit hard. It's not just the financial toll on the bottom line, there is the effort that goes into planning and preparing for major events both for athletes and organisers. It's a challenge for them to have to do it all again, as well as to find space in an already crowded sporting calendar. I'm sure all members of this House sincerely hope that the current obstacles to international major sporting events will soon be a thing of the past. That's certainly my hope, because the T20 World Cup, FIFA women's World Cup and Brisbane Olympics are not the only major sporting events on the horizon for Australia. Next year Australia will host the women's basketball World Cup, the World Athletics Cross Country Championships, the UCI road cycling world championships and the Virtus Oceania Asia Games for intellectual impairment. In 2023, in addition to the FIFA women's World Cup, Australia will host the World Transplant Games. In 2025 we've got the ICF Canoe Slalom World Championships, where Australia's own Tokyo Olympic gold and bronze medallist Jess Fox is lauded as the greatest ever individual paddler. In 2026, Australia will host the UCI BMX World Championships. And I've got my fingers crossed that Australia will also win the right to host the Rugby World Cup in 2027. I know the member opposite, the member for Wright, is a proud rugby union player, and as a proud member of the Southern Beaches Old Salts and an old boy of Briars and Gosford Red Devils, I am certainly hopeful that we win the rights to that World Cup. And there are a few more still up for grabs. These major sporting events entertain and inspire Australians. They boost tourism, trade and our economy, and they strengthen our international ties, to name just a few of their benefits, so it's important that we protect these events through updates like this amendment to the major sporting events protection act 2014. The protections provided by the amendments in this bill are standard and necessary for major sporting events hosted in Australia. They mirror protections for past sporting events. The addition of the FIFA 2023 women's World Cup to the schedule under the act was one of the government guarantees required by FIFA in order for Australia to secure the event. As such, it is supported by Football Australia. The addition of the T20 World Cup is a protection expected by the International Cricket Council and is therefore supported by the ICC T20 World Cup 2022 local organising committee. Labor supports the amendments that this bill seeks to make to the major sporting events protection act 2014. 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 importance of rights protection for hosting major sporting events, and supports the changes in this bill to protect the FIFA Women's World Cup Australia New Zealand 2023 and the ICC T20 World Cup 2022 from ambush marketing; and (2) calls on the Government to further support Australia's ability to host international sporting events by implementing an effective national quarantine system to ensure COVID-safe travel for sports teams and officials". I now have a few very brief comments on the other aim of this bill, which is to amend the Sport Integrity Australia Act 2020. That act deals with Australia's sport integrity arrangements and requires an update in order to correct references to articles of the World Anti-Doping Code, the WADA code. As a signatory to the UNESCO International Convention against Doping in Sport, Australia is required to implement anti-doping arrangements in accordance with the principles of the WADA code. Provisions to the code earlier this year also resulted in changes to the number of articles within the code. The amendments proposed in this bill simply update the Sport Integrity Australia Act 2020 to reflect the current article numbering. Labor supports this bill. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Is the amendment seconded? Ms Madeleine King 102376 I second the amendment. (Quorum formed) The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Shortland has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I will state the question in the form that the amendment be disagreed to. 12:38 Mr VAN MANEN 188315 Forde It's a pleasure to rise and speak on the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021. With these major sporting events, one of the great reasons for their success is their ability to attract sponsorship. But the value of that sponsorship is directly related to the level of comfort that the sponsors have that the legal right to use the indicia of that tournament as a sponsor is protected and maintained. As we know, global sports sponsorship reached a record $65 billion at the beginning of 2019, but—as with many things, due to COVID—it has dropped to some $17.2 billion in 2020. But, as we see major sporting events start to ramp up again as we come out of the COVID crisis, it's critically important that we protect the rights of those sponsors, who have paid good money to sponsor those tournaments, to have their brand associated with that tournament and prevent ambush marketing. That's critically important. In particular, this bill relates to the ICC T20 World Cup, which will be held towards the end of next year here in Australia, and also to the FIFA Women's World Cup in 2023, which will be a tremendous event for this nation. It was terrific to see the Matildas back on the pitch on the weekend on home soil, with a terrific 3-1 win over Brazil. This bill is about protecting the intellectual property rights that go with these major sporting events. In addition, it updates the act to remove the protections for the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games, the AFC Asian Cup, the 2015 ICC Cricket World Cup and the Women's T20 World Cup. On reflection, when you look back at those events, you see what a great success they were and what a great statement they have been for Australia and its ability to hold world-class sporting events. As you well know, Mr Deputy Speaker Vasta, we're looking forward to 2032, when the Olympics will be held in our home state of Queensland, with a range of events particularly around the south-east corner but in other parts of the state as well. As the member for Shortland previously outlined, our congratulations go to the AOC; to the federal government for all the work that the sports minister, Senator Colbeck, has done; to Ted O'Brien, the special envoy; to the state government; and to the South-East Queensland Council of Mayors. It's a terrific achievement, and now we have plenty of work to do between now and 2032. But, if we have a look at some of the other great sporting events that are going to occur in this country in the next 10 years, we see that it's not just about the Olympic Games. As I said, this bill particularly mentions the ICC T20 World Cup next year and the FIFA Women's World Cup in 2023. We also have some other great events coming up. The British and Irish Lions tour in 2025 and the Netball World Cup in 2027 are great lead-ups to the Olympic Games in 2032. We know from events past—we can go back all the way to the Olympics in Sydney in 2000 or the Melbourne Commonwealth Games in 2006—that it's not just about the sport that occurs on the field. It's about all of the other activities that occur outside of that: the tourism opportunities; the opportunity for business to be involved in providing services and supplies to those sporting events; and the opportunity to have arts events that can engage those people who are coming to attend the sporting events. I know the member for Bennelong, who's going to be speaking on this bill a little bit later, for many years has supported the idea of putting together a complete package for somebody who's coming to a major sporting event. That package would include some tourism aspects as well as maybe going to the cinema, to the opera or to a concert or something like that to support the arts industry. I'm sure he'll speak on that in his contribution. As I look across my electorate of Forde, I look at the many local sporting events that, while they may not rank with the events that we're seeking to protect with this bill, are significant for our sporting communities—events such as the Pacific island cultural and Rugby League carnival, the Indigenous Rugby League Carnival or the Skate Australia titles in the skate centre at Mount Warren Park. All of these events, whether they're large—like the events we're trying to protect here on a national basis—or whether they're local sport events, create the opportunity for our communities to benefit, and they bring people into our communities. One of the things that, on reflection, we probably don't do particularly well when we have major sporting events in our electorates is work with the organisers on how we can encourage the people who attend those events to go to a local tourism hotspot or take advantage of some local arts and culture. So, whilst we can do this on a national basis, I think it also gives us the opportunity to do that on a local basis. In a little way we tried to do that recently with the Brisbane to Gold Coast Cycle Challenge, which I had the joy of being a part of. Courtesy of flights down here, I only got to do the 40-kilometres leg; I didn't have to do the whole 100 kilometres, which is probably better. What a terrific event it was. There were 4,500 riders riding from Brisbane to the Gold Coast, with a pit stop at Eagleby in my electorate. Yet, sadly, there was little, if any, marketing of that event in and around Logan to make people aware they were stopping at Eagleby and to come down and support the riders and say hello. Some of our local councillors came down. Miriam Stemp, the councillor for division 10, came down. It was terrific to see her there. When you've got 4,500 cyclists coming through your community, it's a terrific opportunity to have some local marketing and get people involved. You could also, if you wanted to, do the ride from Eagleby down to the Gold Coast, which was a 60-kilometre leg. So it's about local opportunities, as well as the major sporting events which get all the limelight. These local big sporting events are also of tremendous value and benefit to our communities. So I commend this bill to the House. 12:47 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth Everyone knows that Australians love sport. We don't just love playing it, we love watching it. And we will love watching it in Brisbane in 2032 as Brisbane and the good people of Queensland host a very exciting Olympic Games. I congratulate everyone involved in that win and everyone involved in making it a reality. Australians love watching sport. We love watching it in the pub, we love watching it in person at our great stadiums and we love watching it on our flat-screen TVs. Australia's history of loving games and watching sport is also consistent with the history of the First Nations people of Australia, who integrated sport into their culture and their ways of organising their communities and, indeed, in passing down their stories for thousands and thousands of years. As Australia has grown as a nation, some of our most important moments have come from sporting achievements. We hosted the 1956 Olympics in Melbourne. It was in 1962 that Perth hosted what was then known as the Empire Games. Western Australia built on that tradition, hosting the America's Cup in 1987 in Fremantle. I was a very little child in Fremantle at the time, but my parents have very fond memories of the excitement that the America's Cup brought not just to Australia but specifically to the great port town of Fremantle in Western Australia. And then, in 2000, Australia stopped and watched Cathy Freeman win gold at the Sydney Olympics. This tradition continues through to this day. In March 2020, just before the pandemic changed the world, the Australian Women's cricket team won the T20 final as almost 90,000 fans watched on. That's why Labor supports this bill. It will make important changes to ensure Australia can continue to host major sporting events. It has also taught us the concept of ambush marketing in sport. There is, unfortunately, too much counterfeit and ambush marketing when it comes to people trying to steal the enthusiasm that people have for these games in order to make a quick buck. None of that money goes back into the sports or the sports people or the community sport, which is where it should go. I do admire the government's connection of this to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, where they have appropriately noted that there is a right to culture and that that right to culture includes a right to sports and games. It also includes a right to sports and cultural infrastructure. In Perth, we have some very important and much-loved sports and cultural infrastructure, including the WACA, the WA Cricket Association ground in my electorate in east Perth, which has had a very proud past, from those Empire Games to some of those great cricket matches of years gone past. I remember going to the WACA as a member of the Fremantle Dockers cheer squad when they used to play the night games at the WACA, well before Optus Stadium was even a concept in people's mind. I also have in my electorate Beatty Park, which was host to much of the swimming for the Commonwealth, or then Empire, Games, but, today, struggles a little because it doesn't quite have the investment that it needs to make sure that it can continue to train up people. It's great for kids, and I want to congratulate Mayor Emma Cole for the upgrades they've made to the community part of that pool, but it is a huge struggle for the local councils and community organisations who get these brand new assets that then, 40 or 50-plus years later, they are struggling to maintain. Also, when we talk about protecting the culture and intellectual property, some of this is a struggle when it comes sporting merchandise—you don't want to let small businesses become the unintended ones punished for just sharing their enthusiasm for sport. We need to find a way so that small business can be enthusiastic about upcoming cricket tournaments and upcoming Olympics in Australia and make sure that we provide ways for them to show their support rather than just using the punishment that can be dished out under this legislation. While we know that so much community sport, and indeed professional sport, has been hit hard by the pandemic, we've also had some unique opportunities to show the potential that Australia has as a host of major sporting events. Last month, we saw Western Australia's potential when we hosted the AFL grand final. This year's grand final was an historic event for Western Australia, an historic event for Perth and an historic event for Australia. The AFL may have a contract that says the grand final will remain in Melbourne until 2059, but everyone will remember that in 2021 Perth did an outstanding job as host. It was a large event that took much preparation, and I congratulate everyone involved in that successful day. Over 61,266 people attended that match, and I'm sure there were a few who snuck in without the appropriate tickets. But it demonstrated the strength and importance of sport to our local economy—2,600 staff worked on that day; New West Foods, a family run business in Malaga, supplied some 9,000 kilograms of potato chips, 6,000 pieces of flathead fish, 12,000 party pies and 14,000 chicken wings; Smorgasbord supplied tonnes of WA-grown fresh vegetables, including some 600 kilograms of cubed pumpkin; The Spice Merchants—not to be confused with the Spice Girls—supplied 1,000 kilograms of spices and produced 10,000 naan breads; and Cheeky Brothers produced 4,000 pizzas. It was estimated that the entire event added some $50 million to the WA economy. And, while the long-term economic benefits are not yet known, Western Australia well and truly showed our capacity to hold national and international world-class sporting events. It was also great to see Dr Richard Walley welcoming to country every one of those 61,266 people who were there and the millions watching online and on their TV screens. Dr Walley described his welcome to country as a 'modern day passport', which I thought was a really beautiful analogy when we talk about welcoming people here to Australia for sporting events. And, we did have some spectacular local musicians and performing artists, including Baker Boy, John Butler and Eskimo Joe—although I was personally disappointed that Eskimo Joe did not do their classic from the 1990s of 'Sweater'. Maybe they'll be able to play that at next year's grand final. It was all made possible because of the outstanding job that Premier McGowan and the Western Australian government have done in managing the pandemic. If Clive Palmer and the Prime Minister had had their way, WA's border would have been opened and we would never have had the opportunity to host that grand final. Indeed, those 61,266 people who watched it in person would not have had that chance. The 2,600 people who had jobs created as a result of that would not have had the chance. That's why we need a federal government that's willing to work with Western Australia rather than against us. An example of this was the Empire Games in 1962. That was a project that was worked on between state and federal governments. It was a huge success. Over the course of the games, some 210,000 people attended. That's remarkable when you think about the struggles of air travel at that period in time—the cost of air travel, even to get across from one side of Australia to the other—and the fact that Western Australia's population at the time was only some 800,000 people. We had 873 athletes representing some 35 nations performing in front of 30,000 fans day after day at Perry Lakes Stadium. It showcased the iconic parts of Western Australian life, with the road cycle race taking place in Kings Park. As Cynthia Robertson said in the Australian Women's Weekly in November 1962: 'It is no wonder the city is bursting—both at the seams and with pride. The pride has increased daily as more and more people have arrived by road, rail sea and air, and Perth has properly gotten into its international swing.' That's the power of having these major events here in Australia. It is a power that this legislation protects for the future, to make sure that Australia continues to be seen as a strong and stable location for these international sporting events. One of the reasons Perth was so eager to host those games in 1962 was the hope it would help draw attention to the city and help grow the population. I think it's fair to say the games were a success: recently, Perry Lakes Stadium was demolished so more homes could be built to house Perth's ever-growing population. Fortunately, Western Australia has a chance to build on our tradition with a number of upcoming sporting events. Recently, Perth was selected as a host city for the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup, an event this bill specifically caters for. This event will deliver millions of dollars worth of economic benefits and jobs for Western Australians, and it's one of the reasons I support the amendment moved by the member for Shortland identifying that there is so much more opportunity that the government could be out there grabbing for future events. There are so many things just like the Empire Games that are out there looking for a home in a post-pandemic world, where Australia could be the solution. I want to draw the House's attention in particular to the search for a host for the 2027 Special Olympics. There is an opportunity for that to be hosted in Perth and there is, indeed, a committee that's been formed to explore the economic benefits and costs of Perth being the host for that. I recently met with them, and I was thoroughly impressed by not just how much they had thought through the needs of the participants but also how they had worked through the economic opportunities for Australia—not just for Perth and not just for Western Australia but for the entire country. It should be noted that while they weren't noticed as much as the Commonwealth Games in 1962, the Commonwealth Paraplegic Games that were hosted in that same year were also a proud achievement for Western Australia. The 2027 Special Olympics will be an opportunity for Perth to again showcase its history as a place for inclusive sporting events. It's the largest humanitarian event in the world. It's not just a sporting activity; it is a global movement for inclusion. Some 8,000 athletes with intellectual disabilities compete, and 170 nations participate across 26 sports over 10 days. If that were to be held in Perth in Western Australia, it would be an opportunity to recognise and celebrate some 700,000 Australians who live with an intellectual disability. It would be a significant boost for Perth. It's got to be looked at carefully, and I know that the government here in Canberra are looking at it carefully, with their bureaucrats, and I wish them all the best in doing so. Ultimately, this bill is about ensuring that the commercial opportunities of sport remain available to Australians. Without the protections of this bill, Australia would be unable to host the transformational events we've held in the past. While it's important that we have these protections, we must do more than simply punish those that use counterfeit or illegal products. Unfortunately, this government's legislation is too focused on punishment rather than promotion. We must be doing all we can to ensure the chances to celebrate our nation are taken advantage of. This might include creating specific logos for small businesses to use, to jump in on the excitement and channel the excitement of Australians into other engagements as well. I've long said that, when it comes to Australia's art and culture, and promoting culture—and I mentioned earlier the importance of promoting culture and cultural institutions—there are also more opportunities for our diplomatic missions to do that abroad. When these major sporting events happen in Australia, you do find a renewed interest in other parts of the world, and we should make sure that we integrate that enthusiasm into not only the Olympic Games in 2032, as the previous speaker mentioned, but also other opportunities, and make sure that our diplomats are out there promoting Australia and Australian culture. It's got to be more than simply wearing an Australia face mask. We can't just continue to pay consultants millions of dollars to come up with logos, who then then tell us to slap a kangaroo on something. We should look at some of the exciting cultural aspects we have right now. For example, the unofficial ambassadors for the 2032 Brisbane Olympics are Bluey and Bingo. We should make sure that our ambassadors are handing out a Bluey or a Bingo as they meet with world leaders. Maybe the Prime Minister could take a few in his suitcase when he travels to Glasgow at the end of this week. Quorum formed. 15:04 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff I rise to speak on the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021. Major events have historically been inextricably linked with tourism on the Gold Coast, which, according to Destination Gold Coast, was around a $6 billion industry before the pandemic. Events like Magic Millions, Polo by the Sea, the Gold Coast 600 V8 Supercars, the Gold Coast Airport Marathon, the Surf Life Saving Championships triathlon, the bowls—the list goes on. The City Heart Taskforce that I convened last May as my local response to COVID-19 has three executive members who represent the events sector on the Gold Coast. The first is Adrienne Readings, the general manager of the Gold Coast Convention and Exhibition Centre, who has a long history of delivering stellar business events for our city, including the Gold Coast Reimagine Jobs, Skills and Industry Forum in September 2020—the Gold Coast's first COVID-safe event after the pandemic hit. During the pandemic, the federal government delivered $50 million to support business events to subsidise organisations for their trade show costs by up to 50 per cent. Of course, this assistance has been incredibly difficult to realise with the ongoing Queensland border openings and closures, and the border is now not due to open until 17 December. I encourage CEOs across Australia to book their business event at the Gold Coast Convention and Exhibition Centre for next year. Get in early and secure your spot to come up to the Gold Coast for a fabulous event at that event centre. The second City Heart Taskforce member is Jan McCormick, the CEO of Major Events Gold Coast. As Australians know, the Gold Coast—and particularly Moncrieff, my electorate—has a proud history of events. Southport, specifically the Broadwater Parklands, is where the Gold Coast Show is held, and they received $44,440 from the federal government to assist with the event earlier this year. Most recently, just a few weeks ago, the Diwali festival was held at the parklands, where 2,000 people of Indian origin, through GOPIO, met to celebrate the hope of a new year. It was my absolute delight to address and support those who attended, along with the member for Fadden. Broadbeach hosts the annual Blues on Broadbeach, and it received $200,000 of assistance from the federal government last time it was held to ensure it was a COVID-safe event. I attended that event, which was fantastic for local business. The Broadbeach precinct came alive for locals to enjoy music and the entertainment. Surfers Paradise had a new event, Springtime, scheduled for earlier this year, and the federal government delivered $1.5 million to support that event through the Recovery for Regional Tourism fund, but it was most disappointingly cancelled due to COVID restrictions being put in place again by the Queensland state government. The third member of the City Heart Taskforce from the events sector is John Howe, the chairman of iEDM, who has been in events delivery for 40 years. Since 2008 his business has delivered iconic events such as the V8 Supercar events across Australia, the international boat show, the Pan Pac swimming championships, the Rugby League World Cup, the Adelaide International in WTA tennis and the Formula One Grand Prix, just to name a few. You can imagine the difficulty that this business and many others have endured during COVID, trying to find ways to work with restrictions, suppliers and many other challenges they've faced over the last 19 or so months. I thank these three City Heart Taskforce executive members for their input and their capacity to work with me, as chair, to fully inform the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment and other ministers about the difficulties in the sector during this period associated with Queensland state border closures and, to a lesser extent, the international border closures as well. The Gold Coast has a long and proud history of major events, including, of course, the very successful 2018 Commonwealth Games that our city hosted. We have had the announcement of the South-East Queensland 2032 Olympics, which, indeed, is a long way off but represents a historic opportunity for the Gold Coast development across sport infrastructure and many other areas a decade before the Games and a decade after the Games. The Gold Coast is earmarked to host nine events across seven venues, five of which are in my electorate. We're thrilled that that event, or part of it, is going to be on the Gold Coast. The question is: how will this bill affect major events being held on the Gold Coast, at Metricon Stadium or at the Gold Coast Convention and Exhibition Centre or, indeed, at Royal Pines Resort? It specifically protects sponsorship and licence revenue from the events being undermine by unauthorised commercial use of event indicia and images under the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Act 2014, including the FIFA Women's World Cup 2023, hosted by Australia and New Zealand, and the ICC Men's T20 World Cup 2022, both recognised as major events. As the minister outlined in the other place, the FIFA Women's World Cup will see 32 teams compete across Australia and New Zealand. It will be the first FIFA Women's World Cup to be held in the Asia-Pacific region and the first ever to be held in the Southern Hemisphere. The FIFA Women's World Cup teams will include many of the world's most talented female footballers and showcase international football to diverse audiences in Australia and around the world. The FIFA Women's World Cup tournament is scheduled for July to August 2023, with five Australian cities to host the match content. He also stated the T20 world cup will see 16 of the world's best men's teams come to Australia to play T20 cricket, with potential broadcast and digital audiences reaching in excess of 1.5 billion people from more than 200 countries worldwide, showcasing our country. These T20 world cup teams will represent the pinnacle of international sporting competition and include some of the world's most talented male cricketers. The T20 world cup tournament is scheduled for October to November 2022. The coalition government has committed to providing intellectual property right protections for the FIFA Women's World Cup and the ICC Men's T20 World Cup consistent with that provided for the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games, the AFC Asian Cup 2015 and the ICC Cricket World Cup 2015. As recognised under the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Act 2014, the FIFA Women's World Cup and T20 world cup present a great opportunity to showcase Australia from a tourism, trade and event delivery perspective. The protections proposed for the two events in this bill are essential to building a lasting legacy and attracting commercial partners that will invest in major sporting events held in Australia and into the future. Major events have long been targets of those who would seek to create an impression of association with the event in order to achieve commercial gain without having purchased the rights. This is not acceptable, and so our government is acting to protect this sector. This type of activity is known as ambush marketing by association. It has the capacity to diminish the value of sponsorship, to reduce the incentive for organisations to enter into commercial arrangements with events and to reduce the overall event revenue, possibly increasing financial impact on the government to support such events. While it's important to protect major sporting event sponsors from ambush marketing, the rights of the community to freedom of expression must also be respected, particularly in relation to words and expressions that have passed into common usage. A pragmatic approach has been taken, with generic words and references excluded from the list of protected expressions. A number of exceptions will also exist in relation to the events, allowing for the continued operation of rights and liabilities under the Trade Marks Act 1995, the Designs Act 2003 and the Copyright Act 1968—a good vintage, '68; the provision of information, criticisms and review of the events such as in newspapers, magazines and broadcasts; and the use of protected indicia and images for the reasonable needs of sporting bodies in relation to fundraising and promotion, and communities and businesses to engage in city dressing and festival promotions supporting the events in non-commercial ways. The new event protections will cease to have effect approximately one year after the completion of the events, which is 31 December 2024 for the FIFA Women's World Cup and 13 November 2023 for the T20 world cup. The bill also removes the schedule protecting the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games, which is no longer required and makes a minor and technical amendment to the Sport Integrity Australia Act 2020 to correct the erroneous reference to an article of the World Anti-Doping Code. In closing, we on this side have taken the steps necessary to protect the major event owners and organisers who rely heavily on revenue generated by television rights, ticket sales, sponsorship and licensing, to ensure that their event can be delivered and that it continues to be an attractive and viable financial proposition to future host countries and, indeed, businesses, like IEDM on the Gold Coast and others around our country. It is our government who is acting to take steps necessary through this bill to legislate against those who would seek to be associated with major events by spuriously claiming association without purchasing the rights to do so. It is our government who is putting a stop to unfair ambush marketing for our very, very important events industry, particularly on the Gold Coast. (Quorum formed) 13:17 Mr CRAIG KELLY 99931 Hughes I'm pleased to speak on the Major Sporting Events (Indica and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021. Specifically, I would like to refer to No. (2) in the amendment moved by the opposition, which says: (2) calls on the Government to further support Australia's ability to host international sporting events by implementing an effective national quarantine system to ensure COVID-safe travel for sports teams and officials". That's a very important amendment, because what we have currently in this country is the Australian Open tennis down in Victoria over the summer—one of our great traditional events. But the world's top-rating player, Novak Djokovic, has been banned from coming to Australia. We excluded the best player in the world on the grounds that, as a professional athlete, who survives on his fitness and his health, he has decided that he doesn't want to make it public knowledge whether or not he has submitted himself to a global medical experiment and agree to be injected with a novel, experimental, genetic agent. Surely that should be his right? But some may argue that this puts the other athletes at risk, that this creates a risk at the workplace. Over the weekend, no less a figure than the surgeon general of Florida, Dr Joseph A Ladapo, MD, PhD, said: The idea that … vaccine mandates are needed to create safe workplaces is a complete lie. We've also had Boris Johnson talking about the need for mandatory vaccines. He said: … it doesn't protect you against catching the disease and it doesn't protect you against passing it on. If this is what world leaders are saying, if this is what some of the most senior medical people from the US are saying, why are we banning athletes based upon their vaccination status? Surely it should be based upon whether they are COVID -positive or COVID -negative, not upon their vaccination status. This will show the farcical nature of this policy that we have in Australia. The UK Health Security Agency publishes every week a document called the COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report. Last Thursday they published the report for week 42. In that, they compared the number of cases of COVID that are vaccinated and not vaccinated. The argument is that we have to exclude the world's top-ranking tennis player from a major sporting event in Melbourne, the Australian Open, one of the major sporting events in the world, because we think that, because he is not vaccinated, he has a higher risk of having COVID and passing it on. Well, let's have a look at what this data actually says. We know that Djokovic is in his mid-30s—I think 34 years of age. If we look at the report from the UK, the most up-to-date data we have for Europe, in the 30- to 39-year-old age group, from week 38 to week 41 the number of cases amongst the non-vaccinated was 21,726, but the number of cases amongst the so-called fully vaccinated—that is, injected twice, although we know that the term 'fully vaccinated' is slippery; it now may mean extra booster shots, but this is referring to those that have been fully vaccinated under the definition that that is two shots—was 56,004. So there were more than twice as many people with COVID in that age group who were vaccinated compared to those who were not vaccinated. To make the comparison exact, we've got to look at the percentages. This report also does that. It looks at the rates per 100,000. The rate per 100,000 of people not vaccinated was 751, but the rate for those vaccinated was 27 per cent higher, at 956. So this data shows that those who have been vaccinated actually have a higher rate of COVID infections in that 30- to 40-year-old age bracket than those not vaccinated, and yet we have adopted a policy of excluding those who have been unvaccinated from the Australian Open. This is madness. This is insanity. This is tinfoil hat stuff. This is the stuff of superstition and witchcraft. And yet it is the policy of the Australian government to exclude the world's best athletes from this nation based on a nonsense. These major sporting events are so important to our economy. We've got many sporting events that attract athletes from around the world. They love to come to Australia for these sporting events. The Australian public loves them. But these events in future are being put at risk by a backward, illogical policy based upon superstition that somehow, if someone is unvaccinated, they have a greater risk than someone that is vaccinated. We are putting the sporting heritage of this nation at risk with this madness, this stupidity, this primitive superstition that we have that has spread through the country. If we, going forward, want to retain the great Australian tradition of sportsmanship, we need to end this. We need to all call it out. It is a nonsense. The idea of excluding athletes from this country based upon their COVID vaccination status must stop. It is illogical, it is contrary to the science and it is contrary to the evidence. 13:25 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong We are a great sporting nation, and our natural sporting nature has giving us generations of athletes who have gone far with a natural talent and an unequalled opportunity to play and compete. Bennelong was home to the 'Ermington flash', the great Betty Cuthbert, who started her illustrious career with a humble daily run between school and home. Herb Elliott was said to train by running barefoot. But, as sport has developed, we have come to rely on more than just talent and, also, on more sophisticated tools to play well. Ken Rosewall conquered the world with a pair of Volleys and a wooden racquet, but today Ash Barty travels with a team of support staff and cutting-edge technology at her disposal. This is not to decry modern athletes' reliance on technology. Technology is helping them reach greater and greater heights and is a perfectly legitimate part of the sport. No, what I'm saying is that playing sport is expensive and getting more expensive all the time, and, if you want to excel on the world stage, it gets a whole lot more costly. Once you've paid for the nutritional consultants, the carbon-fibre whatsits, the fitness trackers and holistic training, you're still nowhere without the venue, the competition, the organisers and the event. It's a rule of the game that, if you want the best to come to your event, you've got to have the best event, and great events don't come cheap. They have to have the best facilities, the stages, the best catering, seamless organisation and the best prizes, and 'the best' costs big. The first Australian Open, in 1969, had total prize money of $25,000; the current prize money is $71.5 million. God, I wish I was still playing! Which is why I've said many times in all sincerity that, without the sponsors, the game doesn't get played. Consider this: for every single golf tournament played, everywhere in the world, the day before the competition begins starts with a pro-am, where the sponsors get to play with the great players. This started with the Bing Crosby Clambake that started professional golf. Every player who wins a tournament says a couple of things that are very sincere and some that might not be. They thank the umpires, they thank the ball boys and the ball girls and they thank—with the cheque in their hand—the sponsor. We've got some big years of events coming to Australia. Next year, the ICC Men's T20 World Cup 2022 is coming our way, and in 2023 we're looking forward to sharing the FIFA Women's World Cup with New Zealand. If the weekend's incredible game against Brazil is anything to go by, this is going to be one of the greatest competitions we have seen in this country. But these events won't go ahead without sponsors, and this legislation will protect these events' sponsorship and licensing revenue from being undermined by unauthorised commercial use of event indicia and images. It will follow the same methodology as we used when we provided intellectual property rights protection for the FIFA Women's World Cup and the T20 World Cup. That is consistent with that provided for the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games, the 2015 AFC Asian Cup and the 2015 ICC Cricket World Cup. As a side note, this legislation removes the protection for the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games, which is clearly not useful anymore. Building on these protections is critical to attracting the high-end sponsorship we need to ensure the viability of competitions. The protections proposed in this bill for these two events are essential to building a lasting legacy and attracting commercial partners that will invest in major sporting events held in Australia into the future. This may sound unimportant, but major events have long been targets of those who seek to create an impression of association with an event in order to achieve a commercial gain without having purchased the rights. This type of activity is known as ambush marketing by association and has the capacity to diminish the value of sponsorship, reduce the incentive for organisations to enter— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate made be resumed at a later hour. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 52 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Lalor Electorate: Schools 52 13:30 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor Across New South Wales and Victoria last week, students went back to school. It was terrific to see photos of preps rejoining their classmates in classrooms across my state and across my community. If you want to really know what's going on with the community, here's a tip: ring the school principals. On Friday, along with Sarah Connolly, the state member for Tarneit, I had the pleasure of a Zoom meeting, with independent and state principals from across the state seat of Tarneit in my electorate of Lalor, and I want to tell the House what's happening on the ground. These heroes of the pandemic, these school principals, are doing amazing work. Behind the scenes, they are making sure that every family knows when, where, how, and why. They are looking after families in isolation. One principal described to us the three platforms operating in the school: those essential workers' children in the school, those children still on remote learning on different days, and those children at home in isolation on remote learning, who are planned for differently. This is extraordinary work, and they are absolute heroes, as are the teachers who are delivering this hybrid curriculum to our kids. But I just want to say this to this government: these schools need access to rapid antigen testing. This government has an opportunity to ensure that that's provided, affordably, to every school across this country, and it needs to get on with it. Wide Bay Electorate: Stronger Communities Program 52 13:31 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay People in Wide Bay don't wait for other people to step in; they step up. Take Yvonne Pattinson of Cooroy, a police officer's mum who makes children's clothes for disadvantaged kids out of old emergency services uniforms, which she saves from landfill. Each year, Uniforms 4 Kids cuts, dyes and sews discarded uniforms and creates 3,000 handmade pieces of clothing for disadvantaged kids. Our government supports those who volunteer to help make the lives of others a little easier, which is why our Stronger Communities Program awarded Uniforms 4 Kids $5,000 for new sewing machines. Take Gympie Medical Transport, where volunteers drive patients to medical appointments. The SCP has provided $13,990 for a third vehicle to expand their service. Take the Double Island Point UHF Repeater Committee, awarded $15,000 for a UHF kit to access weather updates, beach conditions and emergency services. If you're one of these people in Wide Bay who don't wait around for others to do the work but step up and assist their community in their own way, whether that's driving patients, sewing for disadvantaged kids or ensuring boaties keep in touch, we want to help you to continue helping others. So lodge your application for a Stronger Communities round 7 grant through my website today. Building Better Regions Fund 53 13:33 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons [by video link] Every member here is happy when money is spent in their electorate, but every member here has a duty to ensure that money is spent wisely and with the best interests of the community at heart. What we see from the government is public money spent as if it came from a political piggy bank. The Liberal-National government use public money as if it were their own money. They don't spend it for the public good; they spend it to cover their own political backsides. Shadow Minister Catherine King has exposed the government's outrageous abuse of public funding under the Building Better Regions Fund. Government MPs were given the chance to push for projects that did not even meet the criteria, something Labor MPs were not given the opportunity to do. We have learned that, in the past four years, 90 per cent of the $1.4 billion fund has gone to coalition or target seats. My seat of Lyons received $4 million for a handful of projects in the latest round, and that compares to $40 million for Mallee, held by the Nationals. Labor holds around one-third of regional seats, but Labor and Independent seats received one-tenth of the funding. It's another rort by a government of gold medal rorters. Remember, every single dollar of every single rort adds to the national debt. Taxpayers are footing the interest bill for the Liberals' desperate clinging to power. (Time expired) Youth Voice In Parliament Week 53 13:34 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin Last week was Raise Our Voice Australia, and I had a number of excellent submissions. There is still one that I wanted to read and didn't get the opportunity. It reads: My name is Dipika Choudhury. I'm 16 years old and go to Perth Modern School which is in the electorate of Curtin. Every morning, 4 out of 10 Australians wake up and look in the mirror feeling unsatisfied with their looks. Particularly today with social media being paramount, many young people, myself included, often feel pressured to look a certain way and fit into increasingly unrealistic beauty standards that are portrayed by the media. In a time where the isolation felt by many due to COVID-19 restrictions is already damaging people's mental wellbeing, we cannot afford to lose young people to their internal conflicts regarding their appearances. In 20 years, I aspire for Australia to be a frontrunner in the international quest to help those struggling with insecurities. Whilst it may seem like an impossible task, I believe if we ourselves seek small change, it is achievable. A kind caring voice can be all it takes to slice through a person's mental torment. So, I would like to encourage everyone to compliment those around them, because as Mother Theresa once said, 'kind words can be short and easy to speak, but their echoes are truly endless'. In 20 years I hope the endless echoes of compassionate Australians will create a society where we can live free of anxiety. Child Safety 53 13:36 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth Any missing child is a national emergency. Four-year-old Cleo Smith has been missing since the early morning of Saturday 16 October. Her parents, Ellie Smith and Jake Gliddon, woke to a tent without their child. Police do not know where she is. She was last seen in a pink and blue Bonds butterfly onesie, and she had vanished from the Carnarvon blowholes campground. Carnarvon is some 900 kilometres north of Perth, but Cleo now could be anywhere. Police are searching for any information that might bring her home, and we need community help. Wherever you are in Australia, if you know anything, please come forward. The WA government has announced a $1 million reward for information that will bring her home. You can call Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000, or contact your local police. If you have dashcam footage, social media footage or telephone footage that may assist, please come forward and give it to police. This Friday is the Day for Daniel. It's in memory of Daniel Morcombe. It's a reminder that we have such a long way to go on child safety, just as the search for Cleo Smith is a reminder. Like many in this place, I've met Bruce and Denise Morcombe. I commend their work in child safety. Let's honour that work by finding Cleo Smith. Redland Strawberry Festival 54 13:37 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman [by video link] Last Saturday was the mini RedFest. The Redland Strawberry Festival originated back in 1953. So it is one of oldest community festivals in the state of Queensland. Despite the challenges of COVID and being cancelled last year, it finally happened this year in a pop-up form. So we're referring to it as the 61.5th RedFest, as opposed to the 62nd. It went off without a hitch, finishing with a fire and light show. I have to recognise the incredible committee that made it happen under really tough circumstances: President Peter Goleby; Vice-President Lee Nelson; Treasurer Garry Skene; and Secretary Michael 'China' Walker—who was in charge of entertainment. I also want to acknowledge the members: Rowena Plant, Stuart McQueen, Justina Goleby, Kathy Huff, Kay Howick, Betty Goleby, Sandra Hodder and Adrian Addicott, who was given a life membership on Saturday. They all worked against the odds with all three levels of government, generous sponsorship and support. It was a fabulous event to recognise Redlands' heritage. In 1851, we tried to become the capital of Queensland. That was short-lived, but hopefully the RedFest will be around far longer. It is a constant reminder of our Indigenous and horticultural heritage, right on the doorstep of Brisbane—so we're now an outer-metropolitan community. We're blessed to have the RedFest and a volunteer committee that makes it happen every year. Environment 54 13:39 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson Now that the Minister for Resources and Water and his lot have finally caught up with the rest of Australia on the need to have net zero by 2050, he needs to catch up with the rest of Australia on the need to stop PEP-11. He's netted himself a spot back in cabinet. He might be back in cabinet, but the minister is out of step with Australians if he thinks that they want this risky offshore oil and gas drilling off our pristine coastline. We just don't want it, Minister. My community in Port Stephens is united with others in Newcastle, Lake Macquarie, the Central Coast and northern Sydney in saying no to this project. Last week, the Morrison government had the opportunity to knock it on the head, but they chose not to. The member for Mackellar, the member for Robertson, the member for North Sydney and the member for Wentworth, who all say they are against PEP-11, had the chance to knock it on the head, but they didn't. The government used their numbers to stop parliament even considering the member for Warringah's bill that could have stopped PEP-11 once and for all. On all of these occasions I was pleased to host and be supportive of my community. On two occasions this year I've toured the pristine coastline of Port Stephens with my good friend Frank Future from Imagine Cruises, and Albo came to have a look at what they want to do, too. The Prime Minister hasn't even fronted up. That says it all. Domestic And Family Violence 54 13:40 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra Australia is a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, the international agreement that helps a parent recover a child who has been abducted overseas, usually by the other parent. Unfortunately, it can also be used by an abusive former partner to compel someone fleeing violence to return overseas so the courts in that country can make a determination. Mothers fleeing family violence rarely succeed in challenging Hague convention orders, because there is a presumption of children being returned, with Australian courts placing insufficient weight on family violence. In a case last year, it was only on appeal that the children were permitted to remain in Australia, despite the father's numerous convictions, including for assaults and domestic violence. The 1994 Australian Law Reform Commission report Equality before the law made recommendations on the Hague convention that have not been enacted. The report found that in the five years prior to the report there was a history of violence in half the cases where mothers had abducted children. The report also stated: Although the wording of the Regulations would permit an argument about the effects of violence on children the Australian courts have so strictly interpreted these Regulations that violence has not been treated as relevant. It's a terrible situation that a mother who has fled violence with her child could be compelled by law to return to their abuser, but that's essentially what the Australian law requires in these cases. The government should consider legislative change so that family violence is given more weight by Australian courts when dealing with Hague convention matters. We should not be putting Australian citizens in harm's way. Climate Change 55 13:42 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne After a fake stand-off, the Liberals and Nationals have struck a terrible deal that will do nothing to stop the climate crisis, baking-in 2030 targets that will cook our kids while mining and burning more coal and gas. Australia is being run by an accountant in a cowboy hat and a coal hugger in a cap, neither of whom want to take the action the science demands, the action that will guarantee people a safe, peaceful and prosperous future. The whole point of the Glasgow summit is to cut pollution before 2030, because by 2050 it will be too late. If Australia doesn't cut its pollution by three-quarters by 2030—that's the independent climate target panel's recommendation: a 74 per cent reduction by 2030—we won't be doing our bit to limit global warming to 1½ degrees. The government targets mean we will say goodbye to the Great Barrier Reef and hello to turbocharged droughts and bushfires, mass extinction, rising sea levels and the resulting global insecurity. Net zero by 2050 is a fraudulent deal that will make the climate crisis worse because it has terrible 2030 targets and is based on expanding coal and gas long into the future. By then it will be too late for our kids and our grandkids to stop global heating. The Greens are the only party with the courage not to lie to the Australian people about the future of coal. The Greens in the balance of power will kick this terrible government out and push the next government to phase out coal and gas and take the climate action the science demands. Chisholm Electorate: COVID-19 55 13:43 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm [by video link] I'm so glad to be back in Chisholm to see our community coming out of lockdown and back to life. On Saturday, as I stopped in for my morning coffee at Toro Cafe in Hamilton Place, Mount Waverley, I felt truly special watching so many smiling locals out and about. I had the pleasure of catching up with Stephen from Waverley Blues Football Netball Club and hearing about his plans to get sports up and running again. I also met with members of the Rotary Club of Mount Waverley as they sold tickets for their Christmas raffle. Everyone is raring to go and ready to get back to doing more of the things they love as Victoria reopens under the national plan. I know, however, that many are still struggling and my heart goes out to them, especially to those small businesses still not allowed to open or which have not opened yet due to ongoing confusion related to vaccination requirements by the Victorian government. But we are nearly there now. Thank you to all Australians and thank you to the people in Chisholm for the incredible job you have all done so far. COVID-19: Victoria 55 13:45 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara Victoria is roaring back to life! Cafes and restaurants were bustling, hairdressers had queues around the block and the streets of Melbourne were full of atmosphere and optimism. Mr BURNS 278522 Not yet, member for Paterson! Families were reunited and friends got back together. Victorians have been through so much over the past two years. We have made agonising sacrifices to our lives, our businesses and even our wellbeing. We endured not only the lockdowns but the relentless partisanship from the Morrison government, which played politics throughout this entire pandemic. We heard a lot from those who are from Victoria, but not for Victoria. Victorians knew it was always a race. Those opposite gave priority vaccines to New South Wales and then complained when Victoria wasn't vaccinating as quickly as New South Wales! But, regardless, today more than 90 per cent of Victorians have had at least one dose and, thanks to them, we're going to see our great state open up even more. I want to say a big thank to each and every Victorian who has helped us get through this very, very difficult period. And I say a special thank you to the doctors, the nurses and the healthcare workers who have done so much for our community and our state throughout this pandemic. We have a lot to look forward to. The great state of Victoria is roaring back to life and we're all so proud of everyone for getting vaccinated and getting us back open. World Teachers' Day 55 13:47 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid This Friday is World Teachers' Day and, with students in years 2 to 11 returning to school in New South Wales today, I don't think there has ever been a more important time to thank and celebrate our amazing teachers. I particularly want to thank the teachers in my electorate of Reid, who have worked incredibly hard during the lockdown by being that constant virtual support for students, and also for their commitment and dedication. To the teachers in Drummoyne and to the teachers in Abbotsford, Five Dock, Strathfield, Croydon, Burwood, Concord, Homebush, Wentworth Point, Lidcombe and Auburn, I say thank you. We can imagine the collective sigh of relief this morning when parents across our community packed lunch boxes and backpacks again. Kitchen tables that have been canteens, classrooms and principals' offices for the past four months are now empty. I know that for some kids there has been hesitation and anxiety about returning to the classroom today, and this is completely natural. But I also know that our teachers are well equipped to support students as they ease back into face-to-face learning. While the past four months have been a disruptive and difficult time for our students, we must remain optimistic. We have great teachers in this country, and I think there wouldn't be a parent out there who doesn't have a new-found appreciation and admiration for the work that they do. So, this Friday, let's thank our teachers for their hard work and for keeping our children connected in what has been an incredibly difficult time. Cashless Debit Card 56 13:48 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell There are thousands of pensioners right across Australia who are at risk of being forced onto the cashless debit card scheme. This is a heartless plan by the Morrison government to limit and control how pensioners spend their own money. In my community on the Central Coast of New South Wales, well over 21,000 locals rely on the age pension to get by. Under the Morrison government's plan, 80 per cent of their pension will be put on the privatised cashless debit card. This isn't like an ordinary bank debit card; it can only be used at shops that are approved by the government. If this scheme goes through, pensioners on the Central Coast won't to be able to pay cash to buy their groceries and they won't be able to buy a meal at the local RSL or even give pocket money to their grandkids. As John, who is 76 and lives in Lisarow, told me: 'After working and paying taxes for 54 years, it's an insult for the government to tell me that I don't know how to spend my money. After seeing Scott Morrison's performance, I am not now convinced that the government knows how to best spend taxpayers' money.' The private company that operates the cashless debit card will also be able to see how much money you have and keep a record of where and when you shop. That's why I support Labor's push to scrap the cashless credit card. This bill will save thousands of Australians from this cruel scheme and prevent thousands of others from being forced onto it. Pensioners know how to spend their own money. They don't need to be told what to do by this government. (Time expired) Water Safety 56 13:50 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay Months of lockdown, hundreds of thousands of missed lessons and a tragic rise in drowning rates over the last year—we're on a path towards a national tragedy this summer. I've met with so many local swim schools, and that's why we've worked hard to put water safety in the fast lane, reopen pools and get kids back into swim schools with an intensive back-to swim program. Our campaign had thousands of people behind it to ensure we avoided a wave of drownings as we reopen and head back to the beaches, rivers, lakes and pools. We scored a victory when the New South Wales government brought forward the reopening of indoor pools to 80 per cent and when it was moved forward to 70 per cent. Today we've made another massive breakthrough, with the New South Wales government announcing the first learn-to-swim voucher program, helping children aged three to six to access swimming lessons. To all the parents, families, swim schools and community members who got behind my petition, your voices have been heard. We pushed for change and it is now being delivered. It is great news. But drownings for children in the zero-to-four-years age group are up 108 per cent on last year. We need to get this age group back into the pool and into swimming lessons. I encourage the New South Wales government to extend the voucher to our littlest learn-to-swimmers. Let's get kids back to their swimming lessons and put water safety in the fast lane. Age Pension 56 13:51 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I represent one of the oldest electorates in the country, and my elderly constituents do not want to be told by this government how and when to spend their pension. But there is a real possibility that the government will extend the cashless welfare card to age pensions. They have already passed legislation to do this. Let me repeat: they have already passed a law to extend the cashless welfare card to pensioners. What will this mean for my elderly constituents? They will not be able to choose where they do their grocery shopping. If they want to buy their grandchildren a present, this will be limited to shops the government decides they can buy them in—much like the Soviet Union. If they like to go to a Knights or Jets game, they won't be able to. If they like to enjoy a beer or a wine at the end of the day, the government will stop this. And if, heaven forbid, they like to have a bet, they won't be allowed to under this government. David wrote on my Facebook page on the weekend: 'Pensioners should be able to manage their assets and not be dictated to by the government. This means they cannot buy second-hand furniture and cannot go to a club for a cheap meal. Certain places like butchers take cash. Why should government dictate to pensioners the way they live?' Pensioners have worked their whole lives and paid their taxes. They're entitled to a dignified retirement, and the government needs to rule this out. Labor will abolish the cashless welfare card and we'll continue to fight to stop this government's cruel plan. Parkes 57 13:53 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina It was known as Currajong because of the trees; then it became Bushmans, after the nearby mine; then Henry Parkes, the father of Federation, visited the area in August 1873, and in December that year they named the town 'Parkes'. It is a wonderful centre at the intersection of the east-west and north-south railway lines. The Building Better Regions Fund, that wonderful program, gives so much to our regions. Parkes is the recipient of $6 million towards its $40 million Lachlan River water supply duplication project. That money is going to provide water, our most valuable resource, to the special activation precinct, to the town, to make sure the Inland Rail can be everything it has the potential to be. Parkes Mayor Ken Keith OAM said the duplication project will ensure that the Parkes town water supply will be right for many, many years to come. Correct for the future. 'This federal funding forms part of a multifunded project to duplicate the pipeline, which will boost water supply for our growing community,' he said. Parkes has a population of 11¼ thousand. The potential is limitless. Along with the bypass, these are great projects and they are going to make Parkes realise its potential. Great town. Great future. Housing Affordability 57 13:54 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley Meaghan has lived in the same apartment in Carrum Downs for 14 years. She gets by on a disability support pension. Meaghan can't afford to buy a house, and just this week she received a rent increase notice of $55 a week. That leaves her with a grand total of $160 a month to live on. Just think about that for a moment: $160 a month to live on. Dominic is an NDIS participant who lives in Frankston South with his father, who is on the age pension. Dom has a motorised bed and chair. He relies on a four-wheeled walker just to get around, and he's having surgery this week, so times are pretty tough. Dom and his father have just been served an eviction notice because the property they are renting is being demolished. They're on the critical waitlist for public housing, but they can't find anything in Frankston. There is nothing on offer for them. In Australia today, it is harder to buy a home and harder to rent, and there are more Australians—more people like Meaghan, Dom and Dom's father—who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness than ever before. There is no single solution to this housing crisis, but Labor has a plan to start to tackle it. Labor's Housing Australia Future Fund will create jobs and change lives, with 20,000 new social housing properties and 10,000 affordable homes in the first five years and $100 million in crisis and transitional housing for women fleeing DV and women at risk of homelessness. (Time expired) Flynn Electorate: Indigenous Health 57 13:56 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn Recently I visited the Indigenous community of Woorabinda, a three-hour drive west of Gladstone in my electorate of Flynn, to witness a remarkable program currently being delivered there. The program has the potential to contribute to positive outcomes under the National Agreement on Closing the Gap. The Yiliyapinya Indigenous Corporation's Deadly Brains Program will see around 170 schoolchildren put through three components at the Woorabinda State School: brain health or active mental health development; healing to build resilience; and fitness to build strength. I met with the Yiliyapinya Indigenous Corporation CEO, Sheryl Batchelor. Sheryl is an inspirational, determined and committed leader when it comes to Aboriginal health and education. Sheryl chose to partner with the Australian digital health therapeutic company TALi Health. TALi Health has the technology to diagnose and treat young children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder—ADHD—autism spectrum disorder and other neurodevelopment conditions. I commend the Yiliyapinya Deadly Brains Program for assisting disadvantaged Indigenous children. Workplace Relations 58 13:57 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The coming election will be a contest between two very different outcomes for our shared future as a nation. This government's actions will create two Australias. Labor's mission is to bring Australians together. One way will be a very straightforward concept: same job, same pay. Right now, labour hire firms are making a quick buck off the backs of working people, providing workers to big companies at lower wages than if the companies had directly hired them, and the companies abandon their responsibilities for decent wages and conditions in the process. It's the workers who pay the price—Australian men and women with no job security. From airport check-in counters to suburban libraries to coalmines, you can have two Australians working side by side, doing the same hours and the same job, yet one gets paid less than the other. The difference can amount to hundreds of dollars a week. That goes against who we are. As Australians, we believe in the fair go, and nothing says a fair go as simply as same job, same pay—a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. That is the fair go that a Labor government will deliver, something that's never spoken about by those opposite. Mental Health 58 13:58 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker Much of the nation's focus during the COVID-19 pandemic has been on the development and distribution of vaccines. While the rollout has gained momentum and we're seeing restrictions lifted, it hasn't been without consequence. Closed borders, lockdowns and restrictions that have been put in place to protect our physical health have given rise to widespread mental health impacts, a phenomenon that has become known as the shadow pandemic. October is mental health awareness month, and as such it affords us the perfect opportunity to pause and reflect on our own mental health and wellbeing and that of the nation. In the most recent budget, the Morrison government invested a record $2.3 billion in the National Mental Health and Suicide Prevention Plan to lead landmark reform. This takes mental health funding to a record $6.5 billion. This includes an investment of $820 million for the establishment of a national network of adult, child and youth mental health treatment centres. This network of centres, operating under the No Wrong Door approach, will be an important element of the nation's mental health and suicide prevention plan. I am fighting to deliver a Head to Health centre for Barker to help in the health and wellbeing of my regional community. The SPEAKER 00APG In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. MINISTRY 58 MINISTRY Presentation 58 14:00 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I present a revised ministry list reflecting changes to the ministry. The document read as follows— SECOND MORRISON MINISTRY Each box represents a portfolio. Cabinet Ministers are shown in bold type. As a general rule, there is one department in each portfolio. However, there can be two departments in one portfolio. The title of a department does not necessarily reflect the title of a Minister in all cases. Ministers are sworn to administer the portfolio in which they are listed under the 'Minister' column and may also be sworn to administer other portfolios in which they are not listed. Assistant Ministers in italics are designated as Parliamentary Secretaries under the Ministers of State Act 1952. MINISTRY 60 MINISTRY Temporary Arrangements 60 14:00 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I inform the House that the Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment will be absent from question time today and for the remainder of the week. The Treasurer will answer questions on his behalf in the Trade, Tourism and Investment portfolio, and I will answer questions on his behalf in the Foreign Affairs portfolio. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 61 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Minister for Resources and Water 61 14:00 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland My question is to the Minister for Resources and Water. Can the minister confirm he traded away his opposition to net zero for the resources sector for a cabinet promotion with extra salary? Why is it about your job, not regional jobs? 14:01 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler What we always know about the opposition—they are all about digging up dirt, but not in the way the resources sector does it. It's all about politics with those opposite. The hardworking men and women of the sector are out there turning over dirt, shipping coal, shipping iron ore, delivering critical minerals, driving jobs and driving our economy. Now, those opposite, I'm sure, will continue this line of questioning, but I can say unequivocally: every day that I get up that I'm in a role in the government I'm looking to deliver for regional Australia, I'm looking to deliver for our country, I'm looking to deliver for the individuals that we represent who are out there working hard, paying their taxes—taxes which are much lower under this government than they would be under the opposition, I have to say. But we will continue to deliver for them, because it is about them. COVID-19: Morrison Government 61 14:02 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson My question is to the Prime Minister. The return of New South Wales students back to school today is yet another significant milestone in our fight against COVID-19 and further proof that the national plan is working. Will the Prime Minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is putting the right plans in place to ensure Australia can recover from the pandemic and have a stronger and more secure future? 14:02 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I'm sure the member for Robertson, like many parents in this place today, is very happy that kids are going back to school in New South Wales today, and that's very welcome. I even noticed that Paul Gallen, the former Cronulla Sharks player, has posted today with his kids, and he's been very happy that the kids are going back to school, as I'm sure all parents are. All parents are very happy that their kids are going back to school, because this demonstrates that the national plan is working. The national plan is reopening Australia and giving Australians the opportunities to reclaim their lives and claim back so many of the things that have been taken from them through the course of this COVID pandemic, because of COVID-19. And I want to thank all of those parents who have been enduring the challenge of homeschooling over such a long period of time. I want to thank all of those who were so patiently working through with their kids to ensure that they weren't going to miss out on their own education, and I think that has been a tremendous contribution by those parents. I want to thank the teachers as well, for their very detailed attention to the needs of their students and making sure they were doing everything within their power to ensure that their students were getting the best possible education under what have been very, very difficult circumstances. For those aged 12 to 15, the vaccination rate is 63.8 per cent on first dose, and, on second dose, 34.5 per cent. But, as the member for Robertson will be pleased to know, in New South Wales the double-dose vaccination rate for 12- to 15-year-olds is greater than 50 per cent. Nationally, 86.8 per cent first-dose vaccinations across Australia and some 73.4 per cent of second-dose vaccinations mean there are more than 15 million Australians right now who are double-dose vaccinated all around the country. We are at 73.4 per cent double-dose vaccination. Only a month ago that was 50 per cent—just 50 per cent. The response of the Australian people to the national plan has been truly extraordinary. That has meant Australia will emerge from this pandemic with one of the lowest fatality rates of any country in the world. We will emerge with one of the strongest economies to come through the pandemic anywhere in the world. And we will emerge with one of the highest vaccination rates of any country in the world. That is a national plan to take Australia through the COVID-19 pandemic crisis and to take us forward. As we go forward, the borders are opening. There are 11,000 Qantas staff back at work, getting planes in the air, opening up our country, bringing Australians home and bringing their parents home, from next week and indeed earlier, because of the changes we're making and the borders opening up, ensuring that Australians can be reunited. We go forward with a stronger economy and a stronger health situation. (Time expired) Minister for Resources and Water 62 14:05 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Minister for Resources and Water. Last week, the minister told question time: 'Find me a solar panel that works in the dark.' Is the minister aware that batteries can store renewable energy? And does the minister get a shock when he turns on the tap and water comes out, even though it's not raining outside? 14:06 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler I thought they'd brought the big guns, but they brought the pop gun! Unfortunately, the Leader of the Opposition has backed up the exact thing I've said: solar panels don't work in the dark. That is just a statement of fact. If you want to store energy, there are any number of ways of doing that, as there has been for a long period of time, and it's the resources sector that's delivering the equipment, delivering the technology and delivering the resources to make those things a reality. I say to those opposite: you can use a dragline to dig up your political dirt, if you want, but it will have no impact on me. I will stay focused on what I do every single day—that is, deliver for the people I represent. Infrastructure: Regional Australia 62 14:06 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Will the Deputy Prime Minister outline to the House how the Morrison-Joyce government plans to deliver infrastructure projects creating jobs in the regional and remote areas of Australia, in particular ensuring critical infrastructure in the Northern Territory? 14:07 Mr JOYCE e5d New England I thank the honourable member for his question, and I always note the work he did in bringing about Rookwood Weir with the member for Capricornia. But it doesn't just stop there. There is the Epping floodway, to get the Bruce Highway going north—that was about a $100 million deal, and I remember the work the member for Flynn was doing on that. If you go out to Gracemere, you go out on a new road from Rockhampton. Gracemere is an incredible saleyard and an incredible part of the commerce of Central Queensland. Yet again, the member for Flynn and the member for Capricornia, who's not with us today, were absolutely instrumental in that. More to the point is what we are doing away from the site of this building. In fact, 1,600 kilometres north-west of Brisbane is the town of Boulia, with 300 people. The coalition government has been investing in the Outback Way, from Winton to Laverton. You can go from Winton to Boulia on a sealed road. You can go from Boulia 140 kilometres west on a sealed road; in fact, it's only a further 70 kilometres to the Northern Territory border. We have been working very closely with, and we always know the champion of this road is, former councillor and former mayor of Alice Springs Damien Ryan. He is a champion of Lingiari. He is a champion of the Outback Way. He is making sure that we drive this agenda forward. The CSIRO say that the traffic at Boulia will increase by 225 per cent. We know of transport companies that will make Boulia their base, bringing jobs out west. There will be jobs all the way through. But it goes beyond the work of former councillor Damien Ryan; it also goes to Jacinta Price. What an incredible person she is. What an incredible champion for the Northern Territory she is. I was speaking to Jacinta Price just before I came in here, saying, 'What are the things that are important there?' She went through aged care, obviously, and talked about the investment the coalition is doing in defence and how important that infrastructure is. She also mentioned some bad roads—roads in excess of 20 kilometres, where, over the last 50 years, nothing has happened. She talked about the road from Alice Springs to Santa Teresa, and she said how work needed to be done on that. She talked about the road from Alice Springs to Kintore, and the work that needed to be done on that. And she knows there's only one side of government that she can be a part of that will ever look after the people of the outback and that will ever look after the people of Lingiari. The SPEAKER 00APG The member for Lingiari will withdraw that remark. The SPEAKER 00APG He can now withdraw from the chamber. The member for Lingiari then left the chamber. Renewable Energy 63 14:10 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon My question is to the Minister for Resources and Water. Does the minister agree with the New South Wales Treasurer, who said yesterday: We have some of the best renewable resources anywhere on the planet. Those renewable energy resources can be used to create heavy industry, used to support things like green aluminium and green steel and provide the world's energy needs in— a low carbon— …future. 14:10 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler We've gone from the pop gun to—I'm not sure how to describe the member for McMahon! Once again, I'll be very frank. I'm not interested in what the New South Wales Treasurer has to say. My job is to deliver for the resources sector, it's to look after the water interests of all Australians, it's to ensure the Murray-Darling Basin continues to have the right balance and it's about making sure that our exporters have markets. And with those markets, while they exist, we will fill them—while there are markets for our products, we will fill them. Those opposite look to close sections down. They want to close industry down. They want to close the resources sector down. On this side of the chamber, we will continue to support the sector. Climate Change 63 14:11 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne My question is to the Prime Minister. The Glasgow summit is demanding the whole world lift its 2030 climate targets before it's too late to stop runaway global warming. You boast of meeting and beating your 2030 goals, but it's easy to beat a terrible target set by Tony Abbott. The US has lifted their 2030 targets. The UK has too, with a 68 per cent cut. Prime Minister, why won't you meet and beat the US and UK targets and do Australia's fair share, with a 75 per cent target, as determined by Australia's independent Climate Targets Panel? Or have you given up on keeping global warming below 1½ degrees, thus condemning regional Australia to extreme droughts, floods and sea level rises? 14:12 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I don't know why the member for Melbourne wants to talk down the great achievements of Australians in rural and regional areas, which have seen Australia reduce its carbon emissions since 2005 by 20 per cent. Which is more than New Zealand. It's more than the United States. It's more than Canada. It's more than many countries around the world. When Australia reduces emissions, and Australian farmers and those in rural and regional Australia do the heavy lifting, I think they should expect this place to respect them. They should respect their efforts and they should respect their contributions. I think Australians are growing a little tired of the Greens—who are joined also by those opposite from time to time—talking down rural and regional Australians and their contributions to ensuring that their environments and their communities are stronger and their way of life is protected. The targets that I took to the last election were endorsed by the Australian people. They rejected the targets that were put forward by the Labor Party and the Greens. They rejected them. They endorsed our targets. I said we would meet and beat those targets, and, indeed, we will. We will keep faith with the Australian people on the things that we pledged at the last election, and we will exceed their expectations on those targets that were set out at the last election. The Australian people are doing the heavy lifting. Australia has the highest rate of solar on roofs of any country in the world. Last year, we had more renewable investment in this country in one year than Labor had in six. Our rate of growth in renewable investment is outstripping countries all around the world, and our lower emissions technology road map is ensuring that hydrogen and other important fuels and opportunities are being realised all around the country. The Leader of the Greens needs to understand that it's performance that counts, not empty aspiration, and what Australia can point to is a track record of delivering a 20 per cent reduction in emissions at the same time as Australia has achieved a 40 per cent increase in the size of our economy. I'd like to see another country match that. The Leader of the Greens and the apologists with him in the Labor Party should stop running Australia down. We are carrying our weight, we are making our contribution and we won't be told by people outside of this country how we should be meeting our targets. Economy 63 14:15 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff My question is to our Treasurer. Will the Treasurer remind the House how the Morrison government's strong economic management and its commitment to lower taxes is helping to strengthen our economy and producing more jobs for families and businesses across Australia? Is the Treasurer aware of any alternative policies? 14:15 Mr FRYDENBERG FKL Kooyong I thank the member for Moncrieff for her question, because she is a champion for her local community, with a background in small business, and she has supported policies that have delivered more than 70,000 taxpayers in her electorate with a tax cut. On this side of the House, we stand for more jobs and lower taxes. When we came to government, unemployment was 5.7 per cent. Today it's 4.6 per cent, and 1.4 million additional people are in work since we came to government. We have legislated, through the parliament, more than $300 billion of income tax cuts, abolishing a whole tax bracket, with 95 per cent of taxpayers paying a marginal rate of tax of no more than 30c in the dollar. We've cut taxes for small business down to 25 per cent and we've introduced and implemented the largest immediate expensing in business investment incentives Australia has ever seen. Combined with our 10-year infrastructure pipeline, projects like Snowy Hydro 2.0, the Western Sydney Airport and the Melbourne-Brisbane Inland Rail have helped create jobs across the country, as has our skills program. More than 450,000 places for JobTrainer and 170,000 apprenticeships are helping to create more jobs across the country. I'm asked: are there any alternative policies? We know that the Leader of the Opposition has come up with two. There was the national drivers licence and there was the $6 billion conversation starter 'Paying people who've already had the jab'. And he asked us to support his policy that his own shadow finance minister will not support herself. We also know that the member for Rankin likes to tax a lot. So it was no surprise that we read recently, on the front page of the Australian,Greg Brown's story revealing that the member for Rankin is planning a $27 billion family business tax. Yes, that's right—300,000 small businesses to be affected. If you're a mum and dad running a cafe and you are earning $75,000 each from that cafe, under Labor's plan you will pay $14,000 a year more in tax. This is the Labor Party way. This is their playbook: higher taxes, more spending and, when they spend, you pay for it. Climate Change 64 14:18 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister. Now that the Prime Minister supports Labor's policy of net zero emissions by 2050, will he also support Labor's policy to legislate net zero emissions by 2050? 14:19 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook The coalition does not support Labor's policy, because the Labor Party have a target with no plan. That is not the coalition policy. The policy of the coalition is to have a plan with a target so people actually know what we plan to do to achieve the target that they want to achieve. We have been working through carefully, considering all of the implications. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order? Mr MORRISON E3L I've only been going for 30 seconds! Mr Albanese R36 Yes, Mr Speaker. I'd ask the Prime Minister to table his plan if he's got one. We're all waiting for it. The SPEAKER 00APG There's no point of order. That's no point of order. The Prime Minister has the call. Mr MORRISON E3L Soon enough, don't worry. Soon enough. Don't worry. The Australian people will know our plan, but they won't know the Labor Party's plan. They won't know the Labor Party's plan because, despite having said they wanted to achieve net zero by 2050 for some years now, there is still no plan for how they will achieve it. There is still no estimate of what it will cost. Labor don't even have a 2030 target, let alone a plan for how they will achieve their 2050 target. But what the Australian people know is that the same genius on the Labor side who came up with the retirees tax, the same genius who came up with the housing tax and the superannuation tax, the same genius who came up with all of those economy-destroying policies is the same genius that the leader of the Labor Party was relying on for the Labor Party to achieve a 2050 net zero outcome. The only net zero outcome that'll come from the Labor Party is what will happen to the Australian people and their prosperity—because you cannot trust Labor with an economic plan to deliver on a net zero 2050 target. Our plan is clear: technology, not taxes. We're not going to be mandating or shutting down industries; we're going to let people make their own choices. We're going to make sure there's a portfolio of technologies that we can bring to scale and bring to affordability, backed up by getting the balance right between affordable, reliable power and ensuring that we're achieving the lower emissions outcomes that we're seeking. And we will be absolutely transparent about that, because that is one of the things that the Australian government have delivered year in, year out—being fully transparent about our emissions reductions, across the world, which shows that we are 20 per cent down. Labor have no plan for their target. They've signed up Australia and they want to put it in law, and they can't even tell Australians how they'll do it or how much it'll cost. It's just a re-run, a Bill 2.0. COVID-19: Vaccination 65 14:22 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Minister, will you please outline for the House how the vaccine rollout is providing protection for Australians and supporting the national road map by helping people regain their freedoms? 14:22 Mr HUNT 00AMV Flinders I want to thank the member for Mackellar. Today's a great day. Kids in New South Wales are going back to school. People are going back to work. We're seeing people regain their lives. Looking at the member's own electorate and his community, there's a 95 per cent first-vaccination rate in the northern beaches and over 90 per cent with second vaccinations in the northern beaches. People are being protected, and, as a result of those protections, they're following the national road map, and, as a result of that, they are regaining their freedoms and their lives and all of the things which represent the very best of Australia. All of this is happening in a world where we're now at over 160 million cases of COVID this year. We're at over 3.1 million lives having been lost this year. So the threat is real, the challenge is clear, the danger is present, and that's why what we've been doing in Australia has been so important. We know that, over the weekend, there were another 320,000 vaccinations. We're now at more than 34.3 million vaccinations for the nation—86.8 per cent first doses. These are things which are of profound importance in saving lives and protecting lives. In terms of saving lives, we've seen that Australia has the third-lowest rate across the OECD, of the 38 nations, of lives lost this year and across the entire pandemic. Our success is measured in 30,000 lives saved, compared with the OECD average; and 45,000 lives saved, compared with the United States and the UK, which have done it so hard. And we continue to see vaccinations rise: 94 per cent of the over fifties have had a first vaccination, 96 per cent of the over sixties, 98 per cent of the over seventies, the most vulnerable, have been vaccination. All of these things are leading to the freedoms and protections as different states and territories follow the roadmap. What we're seeing in NSW and the scenes of joy we saw in Victoria over the weekend, of families being reunited, of mums and dads being able to see their sons and daughters, of grandparents and grandchildren coming together: these things are of the greatest human meaning and importance. The vaccination program is driving that. We're going to have one of the highest rates in the world, with one of the lowest death rates and with one of the strongest economic recoveries. That is about saving lives and protecting lives and following the plan. Morrison Government: Climate Change 65 14:25 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to his previous answer in which he said he would release his climate plan 'soon enough'. The minister for regionalisation has said with regard to the government's secret deal on net zero, 'The first rule of fight club is not to talk about fight club.' Don't Australians deserve more respect than this? Apart from a pay rise for the minister of resources, what is Australia's climate policy, and why don't the Australian people have a right to know? 14:26 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook They have every right to know, and we set it out very clearly at the last election and every day since. And, as a result, emission reductions have fallen by 20 per cent on 2005 levels. I said we would meet and beat our 2030 target, and, indeed, we will meet and beat our 2030 target, and I'm looking forward to setting that out at the Glasgow COP26. We will set out very clearly both our commitments in relation to 2050 and our commitments in relation to 2030, which we took to the last election. At the last election there was one issue: it was a question of 45 per cent emissions reduction, which was put forward by the Labor Party, and 26 to 28 per cent put forward by the Liberal and National parties. That's what we took to the last election. The Australian people rejected Labor's policies because Labor could not explain their policy, they had no plan to achieve their policies, they couldn't say what they cost, and nothing has changed since that time. Labor still don't have a plan as to how they're going to meet their targets. They don't even have a target for 2030! I recall that when the government came to first be elected we made very clear, in 2013, that we would commit to the 2020 target. That was seven years from that date. We're eight years from 2030, and the opposition can't even make a commitment about a 2030 target. Well, not only did we make a commitment before elected; we met that commitment and we beat that commitment. 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 went solely to the government's own policy and plan for net zero by 2050 and whether the Australian people deserve to see what that plan is. The Prime Minister has spoken about the campaign where they opposed net zero by 2050— The SPEAKER 00APG No, we won't debate the matter. Mr Albanese R36 The Prime Minister isn't being relevant to the question. The SPEAKER 00APG I'll call the Prime Minister and listen carefully. I am giving a bit more tolerance given the other aspects—the nature of the question and some of the other descriptors in it. Mr MORRISON E3L Like I said very clearly, a government that I lead was not going to support a net zero by 2050 target unless we could detail a plan to achieve it. Opposition members interjecting— Mr MORRISON E3L Those opposite scoff at this. Opposition members interjecting— Mr MORRISON E3L Those opposite scoff at this. What they don't understand is that people in rural and regional Australia and right across the country deserve that: they deserve to know what the plan is, how it impacts them and how we're going to achieve it. And that's what we'll be setting out very, very clearly, just as we set that out for our 2030 target at the last election. The Labor Party just signed themselves up to a net zero by 2050 without any consideration, without any plan, without any understanding of the costs, and they were happy to let Australians pay for it. That's not our approach. Australians will see very clearly our plan for how we will meet our targets, and we will be very faithful to the commitments we made at the last election, where we said what our 2030 targets would be. Those opposite couldn't explain their policies. We could. That's why Australians could trust the Liberals and the Nationals with an economic plan that enables us to meet our emissions reduction targets. They know that both parties in our coalition—which have, rightly, wrestled with this issue and, rightly, considered carefully the implications and the costs and the issues that will need to be dealt— (Time expired) Climate Change 66 14:30 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher My question is to the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction. Will the minister update the House on the progress of the Morrison government's technology led approach to reducing emissions? How does this ensure that we create jobs and strengthen industry as we reduce emissions? And is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 14:30 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I thank the member for Fisher for his question. Of course, he knows, as we all do on this side of the House, that the way to reduce emissions and to deliver affordable, reliable energy is to be technology led. As someone who worked in traditional industries, like the construction industry as a builder, before he came into this place, he knows how important this is for our traditional industries. That is why we're focusing on technology, not taxes—not taxes—and on reducing the cost of low-emission technologies and not increasing the cost of traditional technologies and increasing the cost of electricity. We have seen one in four houses in Australia with solar on their roofs, but we're also focused on a portfolio of technologies that deliver that affordable, reliable energy which has been such an important part of Australia's competitive advantage. We're positioning Australia for success, transparently: $20 billion in our Technology Investment Roadmap, which will bring forward $80 billion of public and private sector investment in the coming years, and 160,000 jobs in the coming decade from that Technology Investment Roadmap. This is not about imposing new costs on Australian households and businesses. And it's not about raising the price of electricity or destroying jobs in traditional industries because, at the end of the day, there are only two ways to reduce emissions: technology or taxes, and we have picked technology. But those opposite choose tax every time. We heard it again on the weekend. The Leader of the Opposition doubled down on his approach to a technology led focus for bringing down emissions, describing it as 'absurd'. He described it as absurd! He described our clean energy focus as absurd. Labor voted against a technology led approach seven times. They will not be happy until Australians pay more tax. We heard this from the shadow finance minister in the last week or so, that Labor is considering reintroducing an electricity tax. He said it, 'We are looking at everything.' That's what he said, 'We are looking at everything.' Mr Bowen DZS Senator Gallagher is a woman! The SPEAKER 00APG The member for McMahon! The minister will pause for a second and grab a seat somewhere. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. Mr Albanese R36 Yes, Mr Speaker. It goes to the verballing that occurs here regularly at the dispatch box. On Saturday, I was at— The SPEAKER 00APG No, this is not an opportunity for a point of order. I've made this clear. I'm going to ask the Leader of the Opposition to resume his seat. As I've said many times, I can't vouch for the facts of answers or questions. If you think that through, it would be impractical to be otherwise. We'd be suspending the House while I was judge and jury. As the Leader of the Opposition well knows, he has an opportunity at the end of question time if he believes that he has been misrepresented. The minister has the call. Mr TAYLOR 231027 They're a bit sensitive, Mr Speaker, because— The SPEAKER 00APG No, the minister will— Mr TAYLOR 231027 they're in favour of taxes. We heard it from the shadow finance minister. She said, 'We're looking at everything.' The member for McMahon is in that club; he loves a tax and there's never been a tax that he didn't like. He salivates over the opportunity of bringing forward an electricity tax. But whilst those opposite are thinking about how to raise the price of energy we're getting on with our technology led approach. Climate Change 67 14:35 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand My question is to the Prime Minister. Given his previous statements that 'electric vehicles would end the weekend', that 'renewable energy targets are nuts' and that the 'world's biggest battery to store renewable energy was as useful as a big banana and a big prawn', why would Australians trust the Prime Minister to deliver action on climate change? 14:35 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I opposed Labor's policies. I opposed their approach to the issues you were referring to. I didn't agree with the way that they wanted to do that, and the Australian people agreed with me. The approach that the Labor Party were seeking to take at the last election on those matters was not an approach that I agreed with. We had policies that were supportive of electric vehicles and renewable technologies—all of these things—at the last election, and the Australian people supported those policies. And we want to keep doing that. Under our policies, we want to see more and more investment going into these areas. That is why we are trying to change ARENA's mandate, so that they can invest in these important technologies. There is $192.5 million in support for lower-emissions technologies, including $72 million to support EVs, electric vehicles, and hydrogen vehicle charging infrastructure; more than $52 million for microgrids in regional Australia—and I know the member for Indi will be interested in that; over $20 million to look at how we can make heavy trucks more fuel-efficient and adopt new technologies; and $47 million to help heavy industry to reduce their energy consumption. That is what we're trying do. The Labor Party are voting against all of those things by supporting the disallowance motion that would prevent us from investing in those renewable technologies, in particular on electric vehicles and hydrogen vehicle charging infrastructure. So I'm not going to cop the hypocrisy of the Labor Party, whose policies were rejected at the last election because they were carried away with a fantasy. They overreached and the Australian people caught them out and said, 'We're not going to pay for your policies that you haven't thought through.' That is what they are not going to pay for, and the Labor party are still in the same place. They still have not thought their policies through. They still have not prepared a plan for how they will achieve their targets. They don't even have a 2030 target, and they are going to the Australian people and saying, 'Just trust us.' Who would trust the Labor Party with an economic policy to take Australia through one of the biggest changes in the global economy that is occurring with energy than we have seen in at least a generation, if not 50 years? The Labor Party cannot be trusted to manage the economy through this major change. Our policies will set out very clear plans. There will be technology; there won't be taxes. There will be clear respect for people's choices. We won't be mandating what they should buy, when they should buy it and where they should buy it. We are going to let Australians make their own minds up because we trust Australians to make good choices in their interest—and they will have lower taxes to pay for them too, courtesy of the Treasurer. You cannot trust Labor on their emissions policy. (Time expired) Regional Australia 68 14:38 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls My question is to the Minister for Agriculture and Northern Australia. Will the minister outline to the House how the Morrison-Joyce government has supported regional Australia through droughts, bushfires and now the COVID-19 pandemic and ensured that the agricultural industry has had the support it requires to prosper and remain a pillar of the economy? 14:38 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa I thank the member for Nicholls for his question and I acknowledge the rich and proud history of the agriculture sector and the role played by Nicholls in helping us reach our $100 billion goal. He knows better than anyone that, over the last couple of years, we've not only had to face up to COVID-19 and the constraints that that has put on the agricultural sector; we've also had to face up to fires and drought. In fact, some parts of the country are still in drought. The Australian taxpayer, on behalf of the Australian government, has invested over $11 billion into drought programs and $2.8 billion towards bushfire recovery, of which $2.4 billion has gone out the door. The last piece is around making sure the long-term economic reconstruction of these communities takes place. The commitment around drought funding has been significant in making sure that we build resilience into Australian agriculture well beyond and making sure that they reach our goal of $100 billion by 2030. To that end, we've created the National Drought Strategy. It has three simple pillars. The first is about the here and now, making sure our farmers have dignity and respect when times get tough—a social security payment that let's them put bread and butter on the table, take the kids to sport on Saturday and do the things they normally do. Through the Regional Investment Corporation, $4 billion worth of concessional loans have gone out to support farmers not just to restock and replant but, in the height of the drought, to refinance up to $2 million of their debt from a commercial bank through the Regional Investment Corporation and pay zero interest and zero repayments. That put hundreds of thousands of dollars out of the big banks' pockets and into the pockets of farmers. That was about stimulating the community. The second pillar is about stimulating the community—over $500 million of infrastructure projects to make sure those economies keep going. You've got to understand that, once the drought hits, it extends past the farm gate and into the communities that support them. When the farmers don't have money, there is no money going through those communities. This was about diversifying their economic base—investing in tourism, bringing people out there, bringing new money to the economy and thinking long term. We are the first government to think about the future. We created a Future Drought Fund—a $5 billion fund that those opposite voted against. In one of the most disgraceful acts in our nation's history, in the middle of a drought, they voted against a $5 billion drought fund that gives a $100-million investment every year. This was meant to be about supporting an agriculture industry that now makes over $70 billion. But those opposite turn their back on Australian farmers in their greatest time of need. There is no alternative to that because, in the last budget speech, those opposite could not even use the word 'agriculture' once. So regional and rural Australia depends on the coalition that it has a future well beyond— (Time expired) Climate Change 68 14:42 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. I refer to his comments in this House last week concerning net zero. Did the Deputy Prime Minister yesterday oppose a policy of net zero emissions by 2050? 14:42 Mr JOYCE e5d New England I thank the honourable member for her question. I support 100 per cent our process of going to Glasgow for the target of net zero emissions. I do that because I clearly laid out the process of how the National Party would deliberate over this. I clearly laid out a process that was never given to regional members of the Labor Party. That process, of course, is that our position would not be determined by the executive, it would not be determined by one person; it would be determined by the views of the party members—and yesterday they did precisely that. The position is settled and we're going forward as a coalition government to make sure we do the very best. It's really important that we've got to that position. I'll tell you why. There is a difference in policies. We believe in technology; they believe in legislation. They believe in laws; we believe in technology. They believe in legislation because legislation outlaws things. And they're going to be the greatest outlaw since Billy the Kid. They're going to outlaw Central Queensland. They're going to outlaw the Hunter Valley. They're going to outlaw the coal industry. They're going to outlaw the miners. They've said they're coming forward with legislation. Opposition members interjecting— Mr JOYCE e5d That is your policy. Opposition members interjecting— Mr JOYCE e5d Oh, you're saying you're not going to legislate it? Opposition members interjecting— Mr JOYCE e5d I'll take the interjection. Are you going to legislate it? The SPEAKER 00APG I am going to caution the Deputy Prime Minister. We've done this a few times. The Deputy Prime Minister will not ask questions. He will simply bring himself to the question that was asked, which he is already straying from. Mr JOYCE e5d For the sake of the House and for the sake of the honourable member opposite, the issue is resolved. 14:44 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I seek leave to answer the question asked by the Deputy Prime Minister. The SPEAKER 00APG You can't seek leave to answer a question. You can seek leave to move a formal motion. Mr ALBANESE R36 I can, actually. Under the standing orders I can seek leave to make a statement to the House— The SPEAKER 00APG That's better! Mr ALBANESE R36 to answer the question posed by the Deputy Prime Minister on whether we support legislating net zero emissions by 2050. The SPEAKER 00APG Is leave granted? Mr Dutton 00AKI For the sake of all of us here, no. Australian Curriculum 69 14:45 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay My question is to the Minister for Education and Youth. With students in my electorate back in the classroom from today, why is it important for the national curriculum to lift learning standards and teach kids the origins of our strong liberal democracy? What has been the response to your calls for a greater emphasis on this? 14:46 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston I thank the member for Lindsay for her question and for her incredible advocacy in Western Sydney. She, like so many other parents in New South Wales, is so pleased that kids are back at school in New South Wales today. In just another week or so every single child across the country will be back doing face-to-face schooling. When they're back, we're backing them with record school funding, with additional mental health support, ensuring there are fantastic opportunities for them when they leave school. But we're also fighting for a national curriculum that lifts learning standards and teaches our kids a balanced and positive view of Australia and the origins of its liberal democracy. If they don't learn about our liberal democracy, they'll be less willing to protect it and contribute to it. Plenty of people have backed this position over the last few days. Respected history professor Greg Melleuish says: We need an education system that provides both intellectual rigour and respect for our traditions. It is the foundation of a civilised social order. Geoffrey Blainey, arguably our greatest living historian, says in support as well: In my view, the condemnation of this country has gone too far. He says Australia 'is one of the world's conspicuous success stories in modern times', and that that's why so many people have come here. Christian Schools Australia said: 'We need a curriculum of hope, not despair—a curriculum that points to a positive view of our nation, not a negative one.' Peter Jennings, who, as you might know, is the executive director of our leading national security think tank, ASPI, says that if we don't defend our democratic values in schools they will be attacked from outside: Australia's been a remarkably successful democracy and that's something that we should teach kids to be proud about. I apologise; that was a trigger word for those opposite, to be 'proud' of our country. I should have given them warning in relation to that particular word! We know they have a different view of our country. When they were asked—and the member for Watson was their spokesperson: 'What do you think about having a curriculum which has a positive view of our country?', he said, 'That's a little bit weird.' That was the Labor Party's response—that it's a bit weird to have a positive view of our country, to have high values and to learn the origins of our liberal democracy— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will resume his seat. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Members on my right will cease interjecting. The minister will cease interjecting. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order? Mr Burke DYW On the standing order requiring members to be referred to by their title: I don't know who he's talking about. I've only said his rants were weird! That's what I referred to. I don't know who he's talking about, but it's not the member for Watson. The SPEAKER 00APG The Manger of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The minister has the call for about 13 seconds. Mr TUDGE M2Y Parents don't think it's weird to have a positive, optimistic view about Australia and our national curriculum. We are the greatest country in the world. We're the wealthiest, most liberal, most egalitarian and most tolerant country that's probably ever existed, and that's much to be proud of. (Time expired) Energy 70 14:49 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My question is to the Prime Minister. Now the government has signed up to Labor's policy for net zero emissions by 2050, will it also sign up to Labor's policy to fix electricity transmission and rewire the nation, which will rebuild and modernise the grid and cut energy prices? 14:50 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook I'll ask the Minister for Industry, Energy and Emissions Reduction to speak to the government's transmission policies, which have been set out now in successive budgets. And I say again: we have no intention of signing up to Labor's policy when it comes to their approach to net zero emissions, because they have no plan. You cannot have a target for 2050 net zero emissions when you don't have a plan to achieve it. That is not a policy. That is just empty rhetoric from the Labor Party, looking for cheers from the hard Left. That's all it is. It's not a policy. They don't have a policy. The SPEAKER 00APG The Prime Minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order? Mr Albanese R36 Yes. The question went specifically to Labor's plan to rewire the nation, which I announced in my first budget reply—a $20 billion plan to fix energy transmission in this country. It went to that and whether the Prime Minister will support it. The SPEAKER 00APG I can rule on the point of order. I would normally— Mr Albanese R36 It is precisely— The SPEAKER 00APG No, no. I'm going to actually rule on it. We're not going to have a three-way debate. Normally I would be saying to the Prime Minister that he wasn't asked about alternatives. But the first line of the question wasn't what your point of order was. The first line opened the question up, because it stated 'Now that the government has signed up to Labor's policies for net zero.' So in that sense you asked about your own broad policies and— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 00APG Well, you did. I didn't ask the question. Because of that, the Prime Minister has greater tolerance, with that preamble there. I'll just say again: if you're going to have a preamble in the question, don't expect that the specific part at the end will be the only part referred to. Mr MORRISON E3L Labor's policies are about taxes. Labor's policies aren't technology not taxes. Labor's policies are about mandating people, not respecting their choices. Labor's policies aren't about getting the balance right between affordable energy and reliable energy and ensuring lower emissions. Labor's policies are just a blank cheque to cut emissions and make Australians pay for it. That's what Labor's policies are. We don't support their approach. We support an approach which is very different, that is technology not taxes, that ensures that people's choices are respected and that we do get the balance right and that we consider carefully the impact of these things on rural and regional Australia. And that's what we've been doing. Those opposite seek to mock that. They seek to mock the very serious process that the Liberals and Nationals have been going through to ensure that we can look people in rural and regional Australia in the eye and tell them we're doing everything both to protect their jobs and secure their jobs for the future. You cannot rely, in rural and regional Australia, on the Labor Party to protect your job when it comes to addressing climate change. You cannot trust them to do that, because they signed up to net zero by 2050 without a plan, without a cost, without a 2030 target, without anything. They are a vacuum when it comes to what it will cost to determine the commitments that they want to put in law. They will outlaw the prosperity of rural and regional Australia. But I will leave the remaining 40 seconds to the minister. 14:53 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume Transmission projects are a critical part of ensuring we maintain a reliable, affordable grid, and we are committed to them. That's why we're supporting every major transmission project in the National Electricity Grid, whether it's Marinus Link—and I know the Tasmanians here strongly support that—whether it's PEC from South Australia, HumeLink or VNI West. These are our focus. We've got the multibillion-dollar balance sheet of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation supporting it. That's why we're seeing electricity prices coming down as we've reduced our emissions by over 20 per cent since 2005. Defence 71 14:54 Mr CONNELLY 282984 Stirling My question is to the Minister for Defence. Will the minister inform the House how the Morrison's government's investment in defence capability will provide the Australian Defence Force with the capability edge that it needs to protect Australians in a changing geostrategic environment, and is the minister aware of any alternative policy approaches? 14:54 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the honourable member for his question. I thank him for his service to our country as a member of the Australian Defence Force and for his enduring interest in making sure that our country, our government, does everything we can to help Defence Force personnel. I enjoyed a phone hook-up with him only last week and clearly he still has that passion for members of the Australian Defence Force, and I hope he still has the passion for this parliament for many years to come. The Indo-Pacific, as we know, continues to become more and more complex and less stable every day. We know that the world is changing and that we cannot take our position in the Indo-Pacific for granted. We need to make sure that we have a significant investment into the security of our country and that we provide support to our neighbours—incredibly important. That is why the security partnership of AUKUS was struck, because we want to make sure that we can invest, that we can work even more closely, with our allies in the US, the United Kingdom and with our Five Eyes partners, including Canada and New Zealand. The government have put our money where our mouths are because we have increased our committed spending into the Defence portfolio now to two per cent of GDP and will go further. We are investing $65 billion over the course of the next decade into next-generation air capability, including through acquiring long-range antiship missiles. Our naval shipbuilding plan, including the construction of at least eight nuclear-powered submarines, represents the largest regeneration of the Navy since the Second World War. If you can trust that track record to the Labor Party, when the Labor Party was in government—get this—they cut spending to the lowest level since 1938, to 1.5 per cent of GDP and they still, to this very day, stand condemned for doing that because, when Labor were last in government, they jacked up taxes on every Australia. At the last election, they promised to increase taxes for superannuants, for low-income earners, for middle-income owners, for householders, for homeowners, for the those looking to go into retirement and, at the same time, they cut investment in defence. It was a terrible period in our country's history. Don't forget it was at a time when they lost control of our borders. Why would they cut spending in defence? Because they needed to plug the holes and gaps in the blowout in spending elsewhere. Labor is known for two things—higher taxes and cutting funding for— (Time expired) Building Better Regions Fund 72 14:57 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Can the Deputy Prime Minister confirm that between 2016 and 2021, 90 per cent of the $1.1 billion doled out through the Building Better Regions Fund went to government-held and targeted electorates? Is the government looking after the regions or is it actually looking after itself? 14:58 Mr JOYCE e5d New England I thank the honourable member for her question and remind the honourable member that the coalition represents over five million square kilometres of this nation. The Labor Party represents approximately 1.5 million square kilometres, and 1.35 million of the 1.5 is one seat, Lingiari, which we are going to make sure we look after as well. The reason we have the Building Better Regions Fund is we reach into the towns of Lingiari, of Tennant Creek, of Alice Springs, to make sure they get a fair deal. It is peculiar, while those opposite are complaining about the Building Better Regions Funds and we are looking after regional seats, that in the same fortnight complain about it, close to half a billion dollars has been allocated by the New South Wales government to an art gallery in the member for Sydney's seat. This just goes to show you the disparity. We in the government will not step back from the fact that we look after the regional towns. We will not step away from the fact that we look after Gladstone or Emerald or Biloela or Tennant Creek or that we will do everything we can in our power to make sure we look after the process of getting better roads to the central regions in the seat of Lingiari. I also remind the House that, in the most recent round, the Labor Party, which represents about 17 per cent, got about 16 per cent of funds. It's hardly a disparity. And I also recognise that we recognise such things as the letters of recommendation and support for the Building Better Regions Fund from the member Lingiari to the projects in Solomon. We can see that. We have built things that take people's lives ahead, so, I say to the honourable member: we will continue on representing regional people, we will continue on with the Building Better Regions Fund, and the biggest threat to the Building Better Regions Fund are the outlaws on the other side. The SPEAKER 00APG I just say to the Deputy Prime Minister, that term, although it's old, has connotations, and I'm going to ask you to refrain from— National Security 72 15:00 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. Will the minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is creating a stronger and safer Australia and protecting our way of life by enhancing national security, and is the minister aware of any alternative approaches? 15:01 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I thank the member for her question, and I also thank her for the very important contribution that she continues to make as a member of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security. National security has long been a hallmark of the coalition government. It's all about protecting Australia's sovereignty, protecting our businesses, protecting our families and, of course, protecting our way of life, and that's why our government has delivered record funding to our national security agencies. But, just as importantly, we're ensuring that they have the legislative backing that they need to make real gains in the fight on organised crime, on terrorism, on countering foreign interference and on improving community safety. We all saw the enormous success of the AFP's Operation Ironside, which took down a significant cross-section of the Australian criminal underworld. More than 300 offenders were charged and over 5,000 kilograms of drugs were seized. Whilst those numbers are great, what's most important is the fact that the real impact of Operation Ironside was that criminals were taken off the street, drugs were seized, meaning that lives were saved and our communities were much safer places for Australians to live in. And, of course, Operation Ironside was made possible because of the legislation that was introduced by this government in 2018. This government, the Morrison government, has been building further on the capability of our national security agencies, and, in the last few months alone, we've ensured that they have the ability to further tighten security at our ports and our seaports, to make sure that they are able to tackle the insidious criminal activity taking place on the dark web and to better detect and counter foreign interference. We've fast tracked the legislation that we need to protect our vital infrastructure from cyberthreats and ensure a stronger regime for the management of high-risk terrorist offenders. And we're taking these actions to make sure that we are in the best possible position to make sure that Australians are safe and that our communities are protected. One of the other important things that we have made sure that we do is cancel the visas of those who commit serious crimes in this country, and, in fact, under the coalition government nearly 10,000 noncitizens have had their visas cancelled or refused on character grounds. We believe that an Australian visa is a privilege. It's a privilege that you forfeit when you commit a serious crime. This government takes national security very seriously. We are committed to making sure that we do all that we can to ensure the safety of all Australians. National Strategy to Prevent Child Sexual Abuse 73 15:04 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton My question is to the Prime Minister. Why did the Prime Minister fail to make every effort to properly consult Australian of the Year, Grace Tame, on his national strategy to prevent child sexual abuse? 15:04 Mr MORRISON E3L Cook Mr Speaker, I'm going to ask the Special Minister of State to respond to this question, because there has been a misunderstanding of this issue. He has responsibility as Special Minister of State in terms of the child protection office to address that matter which has been raised by the member. 15:04 Mr MORTON 265931 Tangney The national strategy development has been made possible through the incredible work and insights of those who have contributed to it. Consultations have been made with victim-survivors of child sexual abuse, their advocates, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, people with disabilities and the Australian children's commissioners. In relation to the Australian of the Year: in March, the head of the National Office of Child Safety had an informal introductory meeting with Ms Tame in Canberra to discuss the national strategy. In March, the head of the National Office of Child Safety emailed Ms Tame about how she might work with the National Office of Child Safety in relation to the strategy. On 13 May I spoke to Ms Tame, to talk to her about the measures in the budget that form part of national strategy. In May, further, the National Office of Child Safety emailed Ms Tame to advise her of the national strategy commitments; that was to anticipate further activity of Ms Tame, including her advocacy on these issues. Further in May, the Healing Foundation, on behalf of the National Office of Child Safety, emailed Ms Tame to invite her to attend a consultation workshop on 10 June about these issues for victim-survivors. A follow-up email was sent. On 14 June, I personally travelled to Tasmania with the head of the National Office of Child Safety to meet with Ms Tame. The position and role that I take as the minister responsible for the National Office of Child Safety, and the work I've done in relation to the national strategy, was one that has been informed by Ms Tame's meeting with me and her engagement with our officials. I thank her for the insight on those issues. But, also, there is the fact that I had concerns and reservations about some of the elements of the strategy. Grace and I spoke about those and she actually assisted me in understanding the importance of them; that will be announced this week. On 20 October, the National Office of Child Safety emailed Ms Tame to make sure she participates and to invite her to the launch later this week. As a result of media discussions on this issue, there has been further interaction with Ms Tame to ensure that she can participate with other victim-survivors in relation to the national strategy launch. Subsequently, in relation to tweets from the Leader of the Opposition, on Friday afternoon I reached out to his chief of staff to inform him of some of these engagements with the Australian of the Year. In relation to the national strategy: it is an important issue and victim-survivors deserve it to be above politics. Migration Amendment (Strengthening the Character Test) Bill 2019 74 15:07 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs. Will the minister update the House on the Morrison government's legislation to protect Australians from foreign criminals? Is the minister aware of any contrary approaches? 15:07 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell I want to thank the member for Sturt to his commitment to community safety. One of the main reasons we find that people want to come to Australia is because of our great reputation of being a safe and fair society. But community safety is absolutely a priority of people who have been here a long time and people who have come to our country as well, and I thank the member for Sturt for this question. The government has put forward, for three years now, legislation to increase the government's ability to protect Australians and community safety from serious criminals in so many categories that I have outlined to the House before. I want to update the House that this bill will come back here and that we will continue to pursue this legislation every day and every week until we're able to do this, to secure better laws to protect Australians from serious criminals who don't come from Australia and to stop people from ever coming here in the first place who pose a great risk to Australians. These are straightforward laws; they're serious laws and they're serious crimes that we're talking about. The bill is well constructed, and the Labor Party knows that. In terms of contrary approaches, though, we have seen from the Australian Greens a particularly contrary approach in recent weeks. In fact they seem to hate the bill and everything it represents. Senator Mehreen Faruqi says that the bill is damaging and toxic, and is glad that the bill didn't pass—a law to protect Australians. Nick McKim says we're stigmatising and persecuting people. In a sense, he has that right: on people who are perpetrating crimes against Australians, the government does take that view. In other ways, we heard the Greens say that this is early onset fascism, putting forward laws to protect Australians from people who will commit serious, violent and sexual offences. A government member: Why does Labor vote with the Greens then? Mr HAWKE HWO In the Senate, of course, we've seen Labor vote with the Greens on this, and in the House we've seen it in as well. That's why it was interesting last week to see an article by AAP entitled 'Greens target balance of power under Labor'. We've seen this movie before. This isn't a Hollywood blockbuster that we're watching again. It's like watching all 10 seasons of Friends again. In the article, the member for Melbourne was asked—in terms of contrary approaches— The SPEAKER 00APG The minister will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order? Mr Burke DYW On direct relevance: what he is referring to now doesn't even reach alternative policies. He's reading different newspaper articles that he'd like to have a conversation about. I don't see how this comes to the question at all. The SPEAKER 00APG I call the minister. I'd ask him to be relevant to the question. Mr HAWKE HWO I'm speaking about the contrary approaches I was asked about. The contrary approach is the Labor Party, the Leader of the Opposition, supporting the member for Melbourne in terms of his opposition to these laws to deport foreign criminals from Australia. That's what I'm talking about. In this article, the member from Melbourne was asked what sort of Prime Minister the Leader of the Opposition would make. The member for Melbourne said, 'A better one if the Greens are there to push him.' I say to the Labor Party: you are better than this. Don't support the Greens on these laws. Drop your opposition to them and join the majority of Australians in supporting the government on more powers to protect Australians from foreign criminals and people who do the wrong thing. Mr HAWKE HWO And if you want to stand there and do that right now and intimidate me, I say to you: drop your opposition to this bill and support our laws. (Time expired) MOTIONS 75 MOTIONS Climate Change 75 15:11 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House of Representatives supports a legislated target of net zero emissions by 2050. Leave not granted. Mr ALBANESE R36 I move: That so much as standing orders be suspended as would prevent the Leader of the Opposition moving the following motion immediately— That the House of Representatives supports a legislated target of net zero emissions by 2050. We have seen that the only beneficiary of the change of policy is the minister for resources. It is always about them, never— 15:12 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the Leader of the Opposition be no further heard.    

The House divided. [15:16]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 55 AYES Alexander, J. G. Allen, K. J. Andrews, K. J. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Buchholz, S. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Connelly, V. G. Coulton, M. M. Drum, D. K. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Falinski, J. G. Fletcher, P. W. Frydenberg, J. A. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Hamilton, G. R. Hammond, C. M. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Hunt, G. A. Joyce, B. T. G. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Martin, F. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. Morton, B O'Dowd, K. D. Pasin, A. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Sharma, D. N. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tudge, A. E. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Wicks, L. E. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Wyatt, K. G. Zimmerman, T. M. 53 NOES Albanese, A. N. Bandt, A. P. Bird, S. L. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Dick, D. M. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fitzgibbon, J. A. Freelander, M. R. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Haines, H. M. Hayes, C. P. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Leigh, A. K. Marles, R. D. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. O'Connor, B. P. J. Owens, J. A. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Smith, D. P. B. Snowdon, W. E. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 15:18 The SPEAKER 00APG Is the motion seconded? 15:18 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I second the motion. This pay rise is a bottomless pit, and that's the only policy they've got. They've got no plan for Australia. 15:19 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I move: That the Member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 00APG The question is that the member for McMahon be no further heard.    

The House divided. [15:20]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 55 AYES Alexander, J. G. Allen, K. J. Andrews, K. J. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Buchholz, S. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Connelly, V. G. Coulton, M. M. Drum, D. K. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Falinski, J. G. Fletcher, P. W. Frydenberg, J. A. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Hamilton, G. R. Hammond, C. M. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Hunt, G. A. Joyce, B. T. G. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Martin, F. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. Morton, B O'Dowd, K. D. Pasin, A. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Sharma, D. N. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tudge, A. E. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Wicks, L. E. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Wyatt, K. G. Zimmerman, T. M. 52 NOES Albanese, A. N. Bandt, A. P. Bird, S. L. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Dick, D. M. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fitzgibbon, J. A. Freelander, M. R. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Haines, H. M. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Leigh, A. K. Marles, R. D. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. O'Connor, B. P. J. Owens, J. A. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Smith, D. P. B. Snowdon, W. E. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 15:21 The SPEAKER 00APG The question now is that the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition be disagreed to.    

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

 55 AYES Alexander, J. G. Allen, K. J. Andrews, K. J. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Buchholz, S. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Connelly, V. G. Coulton, M. M. Drum, D. K. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Falinski, J. G. Fletcher, P. W. Frydenberg, J. A. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Hamilton, G. R. Hammond, C. M. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Hunt, G. A. Joyce, B. T. G. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Martin, F. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. Morton, B O'Dowd, K. D. Pasin, A. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Sharma, D. N. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tudge, A. E. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Wicks, L. E. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Wyatt, K. G. Zimmerman, T. M. 52 NOES Albanese, A. N. Bandt, A. P. Bird, S. L. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Dick, D. M. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fitzgibbon, J. A. Freelander, M. R. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Haines, H. M. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Leigh, A. K. Marles, R. D. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. O'Connor, B. P. J. Owens, J. A. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Smith, D. P. B. Snowdon, W. E. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.

 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 79 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Environment 79 15:24 Mr SHARMA 274506 Wentworth My question is to the Minister for the Environment. Will the Minister please update the House on how the Morrison government is taking a world-leading position in protecting and preserving our oceans and waterways? 15:24 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I thank the member for Wentworth for his question and commend him on his leadership in his electorate during the COVID-19 pandemic. As an island nation, our oceans are the highest priority for all Australians. We care about too much plastic being in our oceans, about healthy fish stocks, about our marine ecosystems and about an ocean environment that supports tourism and communities. Australia's ocean economy in fact supports nearly 340,000 full-time jobs and contributes more than $80 billion to the national economy each year. As part of the 2021-22 budget, the Morrison government announced a $100 million investment to continue leading the world and our region in managing our ocean and coastal environments, and contributing to the global task of reducing emissions. This includes $39 million to reinforce Australia's position as a world leader in marine park management. Another round of the marine parks program in fact open today—$11 million to incorporate sea country in Indigenous protected areas; $30 million to conserve, restore and account for blue-carbon ecosystems and share that expertise with the Pacific and our international partnerships; and $18 million to protect iconic marine species like sea turtles and seabirds such as the eastern curlew. This builds on the Morrison government's $67 million investment in last year's budget that prioritised measures like tackling the impacts of ghost nets. In this space, we recently successfully trialled a device that has allowed two foreign fishing nets—these weigh four tonnes and are several kilometres long—to be safely retrieved from the waters of the Torres Strait so they don't harm our marine species. Fish, turtles, dolphins and seabirds get tangled up in these walls of death. Internationally, Australia is a member of the High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy, and we're a member of the Global Ocean Alliance. We support a global target to protect 30 per cent of the ocean by 2030. In fact, we're already at 37 per cent, and, with the consultations that the assistant minister for territories and I are having around the Indian Ocean territories, that may well soon be 45 per cent of our oceans. All of this builds on the strong track record of coalition governments in protecting the ocean. From John Howard, who created the world's first oceans policy, through to the Morrison government's unprecedented $2.2 billion investment in the Great Barrier Reef, it is the coalition that has consistently worked towards the health of our oceans and the wellbeing of our coastal communities. Mr Morrison E3L Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions to be placed on the Notice Paper. DOCUMENTS 80 DOCUMENTS Presentation 80 15:27 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson 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. STATEMENTS 80 STATEMENTS Personal Explanation 80 15:27 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 00APG Does the member claim to have been misrepresented? Mr ALBANESE R36 I do. The SPEAKER 00APG You may proceed. Mr ALBANESE R36 Today in question time the member for Tangney and Special Minister of State said that he contacted my chief of staff about statements I had made on the consultation of Australian of the Year Grace Tame about the national child sex abuse prevention strategy. The Special Minister of State questioned the accuracy of my comments. I stand by my statement. I believe Ms Grace Tame and pay tribute to her bravery as a survivor and advocate for those who have suffered child sexual abuse. QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER 80 QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER Questions in Writing 80 15:28 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth Mr Speaker, under standing order 105(b), I ask that you write to the Prime Minister to ask for a response to question in writing No. 662. This question was placed on the Notice Paper on 24 August of this year. This now exceeds 60 days, and I seek your assistance in gaining a response. 15:29 The SPEAKER 00APG I thank the member. In the normal way, I will so write today. BILLS 80 BILLS Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021 80

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

Second Reading 80 15:29 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong The type of activity known as ambush marketing, by association, has the capacity to diminish the value of sponsorship, reduce the incentive for organisations to enter into commercial arrangements with events and reduce the overall event revenue, possibly increasing financial impact on the government supporting such events. Memorably, at the Los Angeles Olympics in 1984, Coca-Cola, which was a major sponsor, had these types of problems with its competitor Pepsi. Pepsi sought to plaster their signs over every advertising billboard on every transport route from the airport to the city and to all of the events. Pepsi might have won the taste test at the time, but they certainly didn't win the fair-play test, which is central to all sport. While protecting sports' rights to exclusivity, though, we must also make sure that we recognise the other side of the coin—freedom of speech and broader community access. While it's true that the games don't exist without sponsors, if no-one can see the sport or discuss it it dies a similar form of death to the proverbial tree falling in the forest. This legislation therefore makes some important exemptions which will ensure a pragmatic and functional approach to enacting this legislation. For example, generic words and references have been excluded from the list of protected expressions, as have words and expressions that have passed into common usage. A number of exceptions will also exist in relation to the events, allowing for the continued operation of rights and liabilities under the Trade Marks Act 1995, the Designs Act 2003 and the Copyright Act 1968; the provision of information, criticism and review of the events, such as in newspapers, magazines and broadcasts; use of protected indicia and images for the reasonable needs of sporting bodies in relation to fundraising and promotion; and communities and businesses to engage in city dressing and festival promotions supporting the events in non-commercial ways. These new event protections will cease to have effect approximately one year after the completion of the events—31 December 2024 for the FIFA Women's World Cup and 13 November 2023 for the T20 World Cup. I'd like to conclude by briefly talking about these two events and, indeed, other sporting events we host in this country. The FIFA Women's World Cup and the T20 World Cup present a great opportunity to showcase Australia from a tourism, trade and event delivery perspective. In this respect, they mirror what is an already very internationally heavy sporting calendar. In normal years, international visitors flock to Melbourne for the Australian Open tennis event, and pretty soon the Barmy Army would start rolling in for the upcoming Ashes tour. These summer events will repeat over the coming years and will be capped off in 2032 with the biggest international sporting event of them all, the Olympic Games. On each of these occasions, hundreds of thousands of tourists will come into our cities for these events and then return soon after they are over, with memories of great sporting events at some of the most beautiful cities on the planet. But few of them will stay on. This is an opportunity missed. That only a fraction of the international visitors for the Australian Open are convinced to spend an extra week in Australia is a missed opportunity. These visitors are low-hanging fruit. We don't need to convince the people to come across the oceans to come here; they're already here. We just need to sell them that week in the wine country, in the outback, at the Barrier Reef or at any one of thousands of other unique tourism offerings that Australia can boast. We need to harvest these people. We should be throwing serious money at selling more Australian experiences to people who have already committed to the journey. That's where our tourism dollar can go further and support the regional businesses who need it, especially now. We need to leverage these great events and these great venues and stages that we have. Furthermore, we should build on this sporting clusters idea when our teams go overseas for bilateral competitions. They are our ambassadors, selling Australia to the world, and we should use the opportunity to sell tourism and other opportunities at the same time. Yes, our cricket teams should be seeking to win matches, but they should also be seeking to sell tickets for the return test. We've done the hard part: we've got the world cups, the opens, the Ashes and the Olympics. We need to make more of them. We need to use our events and our great stadiums—such as the Royal Randwick Racecourse, Flemington, Melbourne Park and the MCG—as launchpads for sports tourism in Australia. 15:35 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor It's my honour to follow the member opposite to speak on the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021. Obviously, we've heard speaker after speaker today outline what this bill does. It is, in fact, a bill that merely changes some dates and puts new events into the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Act 2014. But it gives us an opportunity to talk about and to celebrate sport, and it will be no surprise to anyone who knows me or to anyone in my electorate that I want to stand here and pay homage to the people who inspire, motivate and engage us. I'm talking about the elite athletes whom we get to support, barrack for and watch on our screens and whose actions in the sporting field translate into young people engaging in physical activity. I know that most of us in this chamber hope that the elite levels in our sport will translate into young people engaging in sport, because obviously sport is about physical fitness but it's also about being able to channel your competitive instincts in positive ways. It's about learning to take risks. It's about putting yourself out there and putting yourself on the line. These are all wonderful things for young Australians—and, in fact, young people all around the world—to learn. So the piece of legislation we're talking about is one that we can all support, because it updates what our nation's next major sporting events are. It's no surprise that, coming from Melbourne, I am passionate about sport and our sporting events at home. Sport is such a special part of our national identity. I would like to pause for a moment and think about the pandemic and how it has shown us how important sport is in the community. During Melbourne's lockdowns across the last 18 months, I often thought about the very youngest of us not being able to be involved in community sport at the grassroots level because of the pandemic. I thought about what the impact would have been on me when I was in grade 3 and grade 4—that's a long time ago now—if I had not been able to look forward to the weekly game of netball on a Saturday. I know it would have been really, really hard. I measured the days in the week by when I was going to get to Saturday and be able to play netball again. So I want to pay tribute to all of those community sporting organisations, particularly in my community, who responded to calls to maintain their presence and their connection with our community through social media. We had sporting organisations organising videos of training drills and things young people can do on their own at home to keep fit and keep connected to their sports. They did an amazing job in leadership in our community during the pandemic. I know how pleased they were to get back onto courts last year and to get some competition happening, and I know how excited they all are at the prospect of that happening as Melbourne opens up now. One of my favourite sports, obviously, is netball, and I want to pay tribute to the Wyndham Netball Association, who are now ramping up to introduce a competition where there won't be registration fees; it will be 'rock up and play'. It will be an opportunity for people just to get back out there, get on the court and be part of sport again. In these times of lockdown, I want to pay tribute to our major football codes and to the Super Netball competition. Also, across two seasons, I also thank personally the Queensland government for supporting netball in their huddle in 2020. That was when, of course, the Vixens became premiers. Again, this year, there was support for netballers from around the country as they moved from huddle to huddle, and we saw the Sydney Swifts take out that championship this year. While I am on netball, I would also like to put on record here my support for the Australian netball association, and, in fact, for the international netballers around the world. They are rallying to see netball included as an Olympic sport in Brisbane. This is extraordinarily important. And, for the record, for those in the community who believe that netball is just played by women, there is an international men's netball competition. There are boys and men playing netball all over many of the countries that are involved. To those who believe that netball is only a Commonwealth sport, again, you need to be corrected. Netball is played in lots of countries that have nothing to do with the Commonwealth. I want to see netball embraced by the Olympic movement, because I want to see that sport on that platform and presented to the whole world with the Olympic spirit behind it. So here's to netball getting there. While I am thinking about women's sport in international sport and in this piece of legislation, I also want to acknowledge that the last thing I did before the pandemic took over our lives was attend the world cup where the Australian women's cricket team took that great championship. What a display was put on by the cricket world, by our cricketers and by the international cricketers. I also thank the Indian cricket team for the display they put on that evening as well. It certainly was inspiring. In supporting women's sport, it's important that, regardless of which sport you love to play, you make sure that you're promoting all women's sport. This week, for me, watching the Matildas defeat Brazil on home soil has certainly been inspiring, again, after watching them so recently in the Olympic competition. So, I saw the excitement at the MCG for the ICC Women's T20 World Cup live at the MCG before the pandemic changed the way we do things. It is absolutely wonderful to see the Matildas on the ground now in Australia, with crowds. I want to congratulate the Southern Stars for their work at the start of 2020, and we will watch the Matildas compete in 2023 when we get to the 2023 FIFA Women's World Cup. I acknowledge the work and the support that has happened from this federal parliament for that event to occur. Sport is incredibly in important. It keeps us active, it brings the community together and it gives us hope in troubled times, like it did in the pandemic. There is something that I often say in my community. It's really important that our new and emerging communities actually understand how important sport is in Australian culture. Saying that, I would have to reference that we all know how passionate our South Asian community is in my neck of the woods about cricket. But, in our community, our youth sport participation rate is still incredibly low. And it's even lower if you segregate the girls from the boys. So one of the messages that I try and carry in my community is to get people to understand what kids learn playing sport and what value sport is for girls and boys. One of the things I often talk about is that it is true, as part of Australian culture—and particularly in Melbourne—that often when you are looking to employ someone and you've advertised for a position, you go through resumes to see who still plays sport in their 20s and go through CVs to see people who've captained sports teams. These are important cultural things. It's not just about the playing. It's about what it says about you. It's about what it translates to in relation to the character building that you've been through. It's about your capacity to work inside a team. It's about learning leadership skills. It's equally important for our girls to learn these things as it is for our boys, and it's equally important that our girls understand that having a competitive nature is an absolutely normal thing to have. I think back to my time on the netball court and the way it allowed me to just be me, that in a competitive environment I could just be me. I loved to do it. I completely forgot about it. I was never self-conscious on the court. It was all about getting to that ball first. I didn't have to be nice. I was allowed to be aggressive and I was allowed to win, things that I want our girls to learn how to do as much as I want our boys to learn how to do. I'll leave my remarks there. I welcome the bill. Labor, obviously, supports the bill. We need these changes in order to protect our sporting events and to ensure that sporting events continue to come to Australia and ensure that we continue to attract the investment in our sporting events to keep these things rolling so as to inspire and motivate our young people. 15:46 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I'm delighted to sum up this important bill, the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2021, and to thank all speakers. Listening to the member for Lalor, I was thinking she would have been pretty scary on the netball court, but I endorse the fact that she is very nice. The purpose of the bill is to protect sponsorship and licensing revenue from the FIFA Women's World Cup Australia & New Zealand 2023 and International Cricket Council T20 World Cup 2022 from being undermined by ambush marketing. Ambush marketing is the unauthorised commercial use of event indicia, or expressions and images. This will be achieved by including the FIFA women's World Cup and T20 World Cup as recognised major sporting events under the Major Sporting Events (Indicia and Images) Protection Act 2014. The bill also removes a schedule relating to a historical sporting event, the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games, that will no longer provide protections under the act. In addition, the bill makes a minor and technical amendment to the Sport Integrity Australia Act 2020 to correct an erroneous reference to an article of the World Anti-Doping Code. The code's article numbering changed due to revisions that commenced from 1 January 2021. The bill also meets a commitment by the Australian government to provide such intellectual property rights protection for both the FIFA women's World Cup and T20 World Cup. The bill will protect the use of a range of expressions associated with the FIFA women's World Cup and T20 World Cup from ambush marketing and unlicensed commercial use in the lead up to, during and in the immediate aftermath of each tournament. In addition to protecting specific event related terminology, the bill also provides protection to certain images that, in the circumstances of their presentation, suggest or are likely to suggest a connection with the FIFA women's World Cup and T20 World Cup. These images may either be visual or oral representations. A number of exceptions will exist in relation to the FIFA women's World Cup and T20 World Cup, allowing for the continued operation of rights and liabilities under the Trade Marks Act 1995, Designs Act 2003 and Copyright Act 1968; the provision of information, criticism and review of the FIFA women's World Cup and T20 World Cup, such as in newspapers, magazines and broadcasts; the use of the protected indicia and images for the reasonable needs of sporting bodies in relation to fundraising and promotion; and communities and businesses to engage in city dressing and festival promotions supporting the FIFA women's World Cup and the T20 World Cup in non-commercial ways. In line with the Australian government's deregulation agenda, the bill is not intended to increase the burden on businesses or affect their everyday operations. The bill fully protects the rights of existing holders to use FIFA women's World Cup and T20 World Cup indicia and images to carry out their business functions. The new event protections will cease to have effect after 31 December 2024 for the FIFA women's World Cup and after 13 November 2023 for the T20 World Cup—approximately one year after the completion of each event. This is consistent with other major sporting events protected by the act. Once again, I thank members for their contributions to the debate on this bill. I commend to build the House. The DEPUTY SPEAKER HK5 The original question was that this bill now be read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Shortland has moved as an amendment that all words after 'that' be admitted with a view of substituting other words. The immediate question is that the amendment be disagreed to. Question agreed to. Original question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 84 15:50 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021 84

Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021

Second Reading 84 15:51 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston [by video link] Labor supports action to fix the mess that our aged-care system is in, but is concerned that this bill, the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021, falls short, like so many of the government's responses. They were dragged kicking and screaming to have a royal commission into the crisis in aged care, but then, having received the report from the royal commission, their response has fallen short. The government have fobbed off, delayed or outright rejected the key recommendations that were made in the aged-care royal commission. We must remember how we got to a position where we had to have a royal commission into aged care. We had a government that was failing to listen to the experts, failing to listen to the unions and those who worked in aged care and failing to listen to the families using aged care. After telling us for some time that there was no problem in the system they then, at the 11th hour when they could no longer deny the problems in aged care, they announced a royal commission. I think the government thought that this would allow them to kick the can down the road. But, unfortunately, we now have a situation where that royal commission has brought down a report and has made 148 recommendations, of which over half are not being implemented or are not being implemented properly. Of course, this bill is no different, with alterations and a number of items missing from the royal commission's recommendations, which this bill is claiming to address. Of course, the government have not thoroughly consulted with those who are actually caring for older Australians or older Australians themselves. Older Australians, aged-care peak bodies, providers, workers and unions were not consulted in the drafting of this bill, despite the fact that this bill would have an impact on them, including in the areas of residential aged-care funding, workforce screening, provider governance, banning orders and also a code of conduct. These are changes that need to be properly consulted on, and it is disappointing that the government have not consulted on this bill. But this is not surprising, because the government haven't been doing their job when it comes to aged care in this country. Older Australians helped to build this country. They worked hard, they paid their taxes, they raised families and they contributed to our society and our economy, and, as every Australian expects, they expect that in their time of need, as they age, they will be properly cared for and that the government will support them later in life. That is what they deserve and that is what they have earned after contributing for so long to their communities. But unfortunately, the Morrison government have not fulfilled their end of the deal when it comes to this conduct. After 21 expert reports, they knew that older people were not getting the care they needed but they did not act. Indeed, it was this current Prime Minister, as treasurer, who actually cut funding from aged care. The Prime Minister 's record has proven that he cannot fix aged care, and his lack of leadership has meant that for eight years this government has neglected the system. It is a national disgrace. The royal commission highlighted the tragic outcome of this government's neglect, including maggots in wounds of residents and two-thirds of residents being malnourished or at the risk of malnutrition. The Morrison government's failure to listen to Australians in aged care and their families and, indeed, workers in the system, has been so disappointing. I have also been regularly hearing about this in my local electorate. I have met with many aged-care workers who have almost been brought to tears, telling me the difficult decisions that they had to face, not how do they provide the best level of care, how do they make sure that they are able to spend time with each resident, talking about contributions, paying attention and connecting with these older residents, far from it. Local workers have been telling me that they have to choose which local resident they shower on any one day, which local resident gets their sheets changed on any one day. That is just appalling. These workers have been in tears because they went into aged care thinking that they could support and make the lives of our older citizens better. They thought they could spend the time to really provide that level of support, comfort and connection, a level of dignity, but they are just not being given the time to do that in a system that is under pressure. Many people are finding themselves in aged care because they are no longer able to support themselves at home. I had three forums on aged care and seniors' issues recently in my electorate. When I hear people say that they are utterly scared, petrified, about a time when they might have to go into aged care, that tells us that we are just not getting it right. In addition to potentially ending up in aged care because they can no longer care for yourself at home and do not have enough support, many people are finding that they are not even getting support at home through the home-care packages. Of course, the government, in the last budget, tried to say that they had fixed the problem by giving a booster of 80,000 new packages but with a waitlist of 100,000 people and growing, they have not addressed this problem in a substantial way. The maths does not add up. When you have a boost of home-care packages that does not meet demand then you still have thousands of people waiting. I am regularly contacted in my electorate by people who have been waiting years and for whom this measure in the budget has not fixed the issue. Whether that is getting a home-care package or, indeed, getting a higher level of care, there are people desperately waiting. While I welcome the government's increase in packages, there are just still not enough to meet the demand out there. With this lack of packages being delivered, more and more people are feeling they have no other choice but to go into aged care and they are worried about that. Also, in addition to home-care packages and the aged-care system, the other level of support really struggling under this government is the Commonwealth Home Support Program. I have many people who have qualified for the Commonwealth Home Support Program—that might mean extra help with the garden or the cleaning—who think, 'Excellent; I've now got this extra support,' but cannot find a provider in our local area. The books are closed because there just isn't enough funding. Delise, from Reynella, is one of those who had been approved for the Commonwealth support scheme. She contacted my office. She and her husband had been living in their family home for over 20 years and they were looking for supports to help them age at home. After Delise was approved, she said she received a list of local service providers that she could contact to get support services. She was looking for some help around the house and to look after her garden. Her husband had recently fallen while she was trying to help in the garden, and he ended up in bed for three weeks to recover. The need for some help around the house and garden was crucial. She contacted my office out of desperation. She had been trying to find a local provider to help but she was constantly told by local aged-care providers that they could not help because of the lack of government funding. Eventually, after calling and calling all the service providers on the list she was given, she was left helpless with no support. Earlier this year, Delise and her husband made the difficult decision to sell their family home in Reynella and move into a retirement village. She had been reassessed for a Commonwealth home support package and again approved. Again, she was given a list of local providers to call to see if they could offer her services. She was incredibly frustrated to find that, again, all the local service providers said they could not assist her. Delise said that many of the providers again told her they couldn't offer any assistance due to the lack of government funding. Delise is not the only person I hear this from; I hear this over and over again from those who think they will get that extra support, only to find, when they call their local service providers, they cannot get any help. There was also Pauline, who contacted my office about her mother's experience with the aged-care system. Like so many other stories, hers is heartbreaking and it is not difficult to be moved. She shared her experience with the constant lack of carers, which compounds an already underfunded system. She spoke of the times when her mother had to wait 40 minutes before she was able to be lifted to go to the toilet and was then forced to wear a diaper due to the lack of staff available to move residents. This was in residential aged care in my electorate, and it's just not good enough. Josephine, from Trott Park, also shared with me her mother's experience with aged care—another heartbreaking but, tragically, all-too-common experience. Josephine's mother would only get three hours of care per day, meaning she was often left in her room for the rest of the time. Josephine believes the mental health impact on residents is significant and has contributed to her mother's deteriorating health. We need to fix our aged-care system. Whether it is in residential aged care, whether it is in home care or whether it is a Commonwealth supported package, it is just not good enough. I am really pleased that Labor has committed to a number of things that would support people in the system: a minimum staffing level in residential aged care to reduce the home-care waiting lists so that more people can stay in their homes for longer; importantly, recommended by the royal commission, transparency and accountability; and making sure that staff have training and that there is a better surge workforce strategy. The government has implemented some of these things, but they, as I said, are not done in a way that is properly consulted on and not done in a thorough way, as demanded by the royal commission. It is important that we see the government respond to this. I would really urge the government to address this. Older Australians can't wait much longer. I have also heard of numerous occasions when residents in my electorate have actually passed away while they were waiting for an upgrade in their home-care package. This just isn't good enough. It isn't good enough, in a country like Australia, that we treat our older Australians like this. I know that, as we move forward, Labor will have more to announce when it comes to aged care. This is critically important, but we shouldn't have to wait for a change of government to address this issue. This government should put its attention to this. It failed when it came to the vaccine rollout in aged care. It failed when it came to vaccinating aged-care workers. This was meant to be a priority, and it was like drawing blood out of a stone. This government just could not get its act together. So, while I say that older Australians shouldn't have to wait, I think that we really need a change of government. Only a Labor government can be trusted to reform our aged-care system to ensure that older Australians get the care and support they deserve. 16:06 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons [by video link] Many times I have stood in this place to speak about aged care in this country. Once again, the message is the same: the government cannot be trusted to fix aged care. Labor supports action to fix the aged-care system but is concerned that the bill we have before us, the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021, falls short. The government has fobbed off, delayed or outright rejected key recommendations from the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, and this is extraordinary. Of the 148 recommendations, more than half are not being implemented or are not being implemented properly, and this bill is no different, with alterations and with a number of items missing from the original royal commission recommendations that it claims to be addressing. It's concerning that older Australians, aged-care peak bodies, providers, workers and unions were not consulted in the drafting of this bill, despite the impacts that this bill will have on them and the sector, with changes to residential aged-care funding, workforce screening, provider governance and banning orders, along with a code of conduct. These are not small changes, and there needed to be proper consultation. For this reason, Labor will move a motion to refer this bill to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee for further inquiry. Older Australians helped build this country. They worked hard, paid their taxes and raised their families. They rightfully expect that the federal government will support them in their later years. It's what they deserve. It's what they've earned after a life contributing to the community. The Morrison government has consistently let them down and failed these Australians and their families, and this is an issue that impacts all of us. We will all grow old, and we all have loved ones who are getting older and frailer. Labor believes that those who built this country and earned our respect deserve so much better from the system. It is, frankly, nothing short of a disgrace that this government has neglected older Australians and the aged-care system for eight long years. The royal commission graphically highlighted the tragic outcomes of this neglect, including maggots in the wounds of residents and two-thirds of residents being malnourished or at risk of malnourishment. The Prime Minister failed to listen to Australians in aged care, he failed to listen to their families and he failed to listen to workers in the system. Aged-care workers are exhausted, they are overstretched and they are underresourced. As we saw during the pandemic, they lack the resources they need to take care of frail older Australians. It's quite simple. Labor believes these workers should be paid more and there should be more of them. Earlier this year, I was able to meet with Rachel, Chrissie, Karen and their colleagues—members of the Health Services Union, who travelled to Canberra. They work in the aged-care sector and they told me about the HSU's Change Aged Care campaign. Their compassion for the people they care for was evident, but so was the need for better pay, more support and job security for the incredibly important work they do. A similar campaign by the United Workers Union has identified several workforce issues within aged-care facilities in my electorate over the past few months, including unfilled shifts, understaffing and excessive unpaid overtime. A key theme of that campaign was more time to care: older residents in aged care simply need more time with the people who care for them. The women I sat down with are incredible, hardworking women—just ordinary women who you would see every day in the street: mums, even grandmothers, doing hard physical work. They would sit with residents during their lunch breaks because they had no time during their paid shifts. These are incredibly dedicated people doing this work, and they don't do it for the money; they do it because they care. A properly and transparently funded aged-care sector will lead to better pay and conditions for all aged-care workers, and only this can ensure the high-quality care that all older Australians deserve. We all know that the aged-care sector will likely face a critical workforce shortage in the coming years—a shortage of more than 110,000 workers over the next decade. What we see with aged-care work is that it's so hard for young people who come through that a lot of them don't stick it out. They can go and get a job somewhere else that pays better and has less onerous conditions, so there's a lot of churn in this industry. What we need are long-term workers, people who stick it out for years, who residents get to know and who get to know the systems in place. We need a better place, better pay and a workforce with better conditions. But it seems that creating and training the workforce that cares for some of our most vulnerable citizens is simply not a priority for the Morrison government. Just last month we heard reports of the government dragging its feet on funding for a new respite and training facility in northern Tasmania. Community Care TASMANIA has announced plans to develop a respite and training centre for excellence, with the proposed facility to include six rooms, each available for respite care, along with a communal lounge, consultation rooms, nurses' offices and a training facility. CCT approached the government to provide $2 million as part of a federal infrastructure grant program. Funding was supposed to be announced in July, but so far it has been crickets from the government. I would hate to think that this funding is available but that it has simply not been announced because the government is more interested in announcing funding close to an election than getting the funding out the door so that these residents can start getting the care they need and these families can get the respite they need. That would be terrible, if the funding has already been made available but simply not been announced because the government is more interested in its own political fortunes and an election announcement rather than getting the money out the door. I hope that's not the case. But Labor knows that nothing will change in the aged-care sector without real reform to the workforce. Unfortunately, we have seen nothing from those opposite to improve wages for overstretched, undervalued aged-care workers, and this has to be a major priority of any aged-care reform: better pay and better conditions for the people who provide the care. When it comes to reforming the aged-care sector, there's a laundry list of what this government simply has not done. Of the 148 recommendations from the aged-care royal commission, more than half are not being implemented, or are not being implemented properly, and that beggars belief. The government has ignored the recommendation to require a nurse to be on duty 24/7 in residential care and the government has failed to clear the home-care package waitlist of 100,000. Only 80,000 packages were included in the budget over the next two years and thousands more Australians joined the waitlist every year. The maths do not add up. I receive calls to my electorate daily from concerned families whose loved ones have been waiting months or even years for the support they need to continue living in their own homes. The assessments are done, the packages are not funded but they're assessed as having deserved the packages, and some people are dying before the funding they have been assessed for becomes available. It is an absolute outrage. Just a few weeks ago my office was contacted by Sandra about much-needed in-home support for her partner, Richard. Richard had been on the waiting list for a home-care package since November 2020—11 long months during which his health deteriorated to a point where Sandra was struggling to provide the level of care Richard needed. Sandra's own health and wellbeing was going downhill as the physical and emotional demands of being a full-time carer were beginning to have an impact on her. My office was able to assist with getting Richard's home-care package approved, but it should not take intervention by a federal member of parliament for people to simply get the support they desperately need. We know what the Morrison government is not doing, but let's consider for a moment what it is doing. This government is gifting $3.2 billion to aged-care providers via a basic daily fee increase with no strings attached—billions of dollars with no mechanism to ensure that any of it goes to actual care or better food and not to management bonuses or a new office fit-out. We've seen the reports in the press of the aged-care providers on the mainland with their Maseratis and expensive mansions. There is nothing in this package to stop people like that from buying a new Maserati or a new mansion. It's an absolute disgrace that the government is handing this money over without the strings of better care or better staffing. It's simply not good enough. The Prime Minister 's record proves he simply cannot be trusted to fix aged care. This is a government that threw $20 billion at profitable companies but refuses to do what is desperately needed to fix aged care. Older Australians deserve so much better. Older Australians deserve dignity and respect. After eight long years of Liberal-National government, another three years, clearly, will not fix the aged-care crisis. Only an Albanese Labor government will get this job done. 16:18 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I welcome the opportunity to make a contribution on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill. The electorate of Shortland, which I have the privilege of representing in this place, is the sixth-oldest electorate in Australia. Aged care, both residential and home based, matters to my constituents, and they know that they have been let down by the Liberals and Nationals over the last eight years. The pandemic has revealed failures of the system and, shockingly, 766 of our fellow Australians have died in aged care over the past 18 months. This is a damning indictment on the coalition's management of aged care. This bill would amend the Aged Care Act 1997 to require all approved aged-care providers to always have at least one registered nurse on duty. That would seem like a no-brainer to many Australians. While this was a recommendation from the royal commission that the government accepted, so far the government has only committed to requiring a registered nurse to be on site at residential facilities for 16 hours a day. This is the classic marketing approach we expect from the man who leads this government and his pathetic excuse for a minister for senior Australians—a big announcement accepting the royal commission's recommendations but then in practice not following up. This is another clear example of the government's 'all announcement, no delivery' style of government, and they are consciously and willingly misleading elderly Australians that I represent in this place. In speaking on this bill relating to the government's response to the aged-care royal commission, I want to highlight some facts and figures that will be deeply uncomfortable for the government, or they should be. Fact 1: the Prime Minister's changes to the Aged Care Funding Instrument between 2016 and 2021 has led to a gap in funding of between $2.1 billion and $2.5 billion from what the total funding position would otherwise have been. The key point here is that, because of the decisions of the Prime Minister when he was Treasurer, billions of dollars have been stripped away from the aged-care system over the past four years. And, for the record, this figure is based on analysis from the independent Parliamentary Budget Office. I say to the Prime Minister: these cuts have consequences, and we have seen vividly, in the deaths of hundreds of Australians, what the results of cutting funding to aged care are. Some may find this offensive. Well, what I find offensive is the very real risk that thousands of my elderly constituents will not receive the care and attention they deserve because of budgetary decisions of this government. Fact 2: the aged-care sector is facing a massive workforce shortage in the coming years. In reference to the bill we are debating, there will be no capacity to respond to the royal commission's recommendations as the sector is 110,000 workers short of what they need. This figure comes from the Committee for Economic Development of Australia and their chief economist, Jarrod Ball, who recently said: We will need at least 17,000 more direct aged-care workers each year in the next decade just to meet basic standards of care. Let me repeat that: 110,000 extra aged-care workers will be needed just to meet basic standards of care, let alone responding to the horrifying neglect the royal commission revealed. The truth is I have had the privilege of meeting with many aged-care workers, and they are passionate about what they do. They love what they do. They do it because they can have a meaningful impact on the lives of many senior Australians. But, whenever I talk to them about it, they say they find it so frustrating because, as they point out—and I have met with aged-care workers who have been in the industry for over 20 years—they could get a job at Bunnings and earn more than they do looking after some of the most vulnerable Australians in this country. That's unacceptable—that you could earn more at Bunnings than in looking after elderly Australians. They also make the point that there is very little capacity for training and skills development; there's a real lack of capacity for portability of skills and leave entitlements, which is really important given so many of these workers are casual; and there's a real variation in their employers' attitudes towards things like training to lifting equipment to quality care for their residents. So, if we are to provide a better quality aged care for Australians, and I passionately believe that we should be doing that, we need to address the workforce issues first and foremost. Fact 3: also affecting aged care is the current intention of the Morrison government to privatise aged-care assessments. This isn't surprising; privatisation is something that's in the Liberals' DNA, and we should not forget that it was the Howard government that made very significant changes to aged care, bringing the private sector into aged care, which has led to the situation we face today. The Liberals' obsession with neoliberal economics and their cruel embrace of free-market economics at the expense of human dignity is not how Australians expect the elderly to be treated—as commodities—but that's what we see more and more with this government. In speaking on this bill regarding the royal commission, I want to highlight that privatising aged-care assessments was not a recommendation of the royal commission and attempts by the government to do this have been condemned by the Australian Medical Association. The AMA President, Omar Khorshid, said last month, 'A market-based approach is a recipe for aged-care service providers to put profits before patients.' And we saw that during the pandemic, where the vast majority of the deaths in aged-care homes occurred at privately owned facilities, and the previous Labor speaker talked about Maserati-driving aged-care-home owners who were often delivering the worst possible care for their residents. I say to my constituents, particularly the elderly ones: I will continue to fight any move to privatise aged-care assessments, because it is the thin edge of the wedge that will just impose a greater profit motive in the sector. Another problem in the aged-care sector is the long waiting list for home-care packages. For example, there's the case of Helen from Redhead. Helen's family came to my office at Saint Temple last year seeking assistance. Her home-care package had been approved to be upgraded from level 2 to level 3, and she was told that she'd been placed on a national priority system but that there was a waiting time of one year. The government was accurate in that forecast: her funding for the increase has just been approved one year later. So I say to this government: you can brag about how much you're spending, but when you're consciously holding back packages that you've promised to save money, you're doing a grave disservice to older Australians. The fact that we have a waiting list of over 100,000 Australians, who've been assessed by ACAT as being eligible for a home-care package but haven't received funding, is a disgrace and an assault on elderly Australians. Another assault on elderly Australians is what's occurring in the home modification part of the aged-care sector. This must be a priority—the three tiers of aged care: home modifications is the first step. The second is home-care packages, and the third is residential aged care. The more that we can invest in the homes and services so our older Australians can stay in their homes, the better for them, for the community and for the taxpayer. But this government is intent on nickel and diming this particular area. In my particular region, we've gone through a very traumatic experience where previously we had three home-care modification companies servicing the Hunter region, but two of those companies have withdrawn from the market, leaving only one home-care modification company. And the government hasn't reallocated funding, so that one home-care modification company is now dealing with a huge waiting list for their services. There's been no additional funding and there's no ability to bring on more staff to deal with the fact that the two other companies have exited the market. Instead, there's just a longer waiting list for people to get ramps installed, shower rails installed—critical fall precautions that will keep people in their homes longer, that will save and avoid trauma to them, that will save taxpayers' money in the emergency department of hospitals and that will delay any move to residential aged care. These are the important aspects of aged care that this government should be addressing. Instead we've got this timid and limited response to one recommendation of the aged care royal commission, demonstrating that this government does not give a fig for older Australians. They make big announcements at budget time about how many billions of dollars they're putting into aged care, how many home-care packages they're releasing, but in the end the proof is in the pudding and this government does not care about older Australians, does not fulfil that sacred contract that we have with every older Australian to give them a dignified retirement. That's why we really need to reform the aged-care system, but sadly this government is not up to that task. 16:27 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie We support any steps that will fix the aged-care system, but this bill, like so much of what this government has done, is a very meagre response. It's a bare minimum. It's probably not even a minimum. It falls short of the sorts of things that older people who are in aged care and their families and the people who care for them should be expecting. The government has fobbed off or delayed or simply rejected key recommendations from the aged care royal commission, which was done, let's remember, because of how dire the situation was in aged care. Of the 148 recommendations, over half are not being implemented or are not being implemented properly, and this bill is no different, with alterations and a number of items missing from the original royal commission recommendations that this bill claims to be addressing. It's also very concerning that older Australians, the aged-care peak bodies, the providers, the workers and their unions, like the HSU and the nurses and midwives, were not consulted in the drafting of this bill despite the impacts that the things in this bill will have on them, considering it covers things like funding, workforce screening, governance and banning orders under code of conduct. These are all very significant areas of concern, and there should have been consultation. This is yet another example where we see the government producing stuff and not listening and talking with the people whose input they should be seeking. When I visit my dad in his aged-care facility, I get an insight into the overworked, underpaid yet extraordinarily caring workforce who care for him and his fellow residents. I see their efforts to bring a richness, even during the pandemic, to the lives of every person that they care for. For instance, at the Anzac Day service for residents this year, my dad was absolutely resplendent in his sports jacket, with his rosemary and poppy, and his wearing of a multicoloured wig to mark Harmony Day was something my mum and I never thought we would see! But the big grin he had showed that he was really enjoying the attention and the engagement. Older Australians like my dad helped build this country. They worked hard, they built businesses, they paid their taxes and they raised their families, and they rightly expect that the federal government will support them in their frailer years. That's what they deserve. It's what they've earned after a life of contributing to their communities and to Australia. But the Morrison government has consistently let them down, and I hear from people on a weekly basis who are struggling with the circumstances that their families face in aged care or that they fear that they're going to experience. After 21 reports the Morrison government knew that older people were suffering in aged care, but they didn't fix the problem. They had to be dragged to it, and they're still not fixing it. As Treasurer, Scott Morrison, the Prime Minister now, was actually cutting funding. His record proves that he cannot be trusted to fix aged care. Another three years of the Morrison government will not do it. After eight long years, there is still a crisis in many aged-care facilities. In Macquarie, in the Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury, the aged-care centres have felt the pressure of trying to keep COVID out, and I want to take a moment to talk about that. In the months that they were waiting for the promised vaccinations, there was great fear about the impact COVID would have, and, even when residents were largely vaccinated, staff were not. It's beyond my comprehension that the government could not get its act together to vaccinate residents and staff at the same time. Clearly the lack of supply of vaccines kept the threat of COVID in aged care much higher than it should have been for longer than it should have been. The lack of coordination in the rollout—a federal responsibility, outsourced to the private sector—left many aged-care resident families and workers dismayed, and unvaccinated. It was a terrible failure of government. There were not any assurances to providers that they would have adequate staff to be able to manage all the things that happened to them when they had a break-out of COVID or even on a day-to-day basis so that they could ensure that family members could come in safely and visit relatives. I think we all know in here the loneliness that those residents have experienced. It's really something this government should be apologising for. There were ways to do it, but it needed resources way beyond the existing resources that aged-care facilities had. The government needed to support it. I want to turn to the lives that were lost in aged care in my electorate during the pandemic. Based on the Commonwealth Department of Health data from just last month, there were 60 cases of COVID in three aged-care facilities. Forty-two were residents, and the remainder were staff. Eight residents died of COVID or COVID related causes. I can only express my deepest sympathies to the families who experienced those losses and to the carers who had been part of that person's life for the time that they had been in care. I hope that these are the last deaths and I welcome the government decision to provide boosters for aged-care residents. We do need to do what we can to keep people who are already vulnerable safe. And I do rest easier knowing that those looking after my dad are vaccinated, although I recognise that they can still catch COVID and they can still share COVID with each other and with the residents. I think we've got a real opportunity to reduce the risks for people in aged care by much better use of rapid antigen testing. Rapid antigen testing was provided free by the government for some local government areas of concern but not automatically in mine, and most facilities missed out. It's had to be paid for by the facilities. It's a really useful tool, and when self-testing kits are allowed to be used from 1 November, it will be an even easier tool to use, not requiring nurse supervision to administer. It's an easier way to provide an extra level of confidence that workers are not COVID-positive. Rapid antigen testing can also provide much more confidence for facilities to open their doors to the families and friends of residents and the activities that so enrich the lives of people who live there. You do the test, you wait 10 minutes and you know with a reasonable level of assurance whether you're carrying a high viral level of COVID or not. To be able to hug their loved ones without a plastic shield is vital for residents in aged care, and it's equally vital for their family members, but these tests have to be affordable both for the facilities and the families. The deprivation that residents have suffered can't continue, and they have to be prioritised by the government. But, given what we've seen in aged care and given what we see in this bill, I don't have a high level of confidence in this government to put the needs of aged-care residents and their families first. The system has been neglected for eight long years. It truly is a national disgrace. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety graphically highlighted the tragic outcomes of the neglect that some people had experienced, including maggots in the wounds of residents and two-thirds of residents being malnourished or at risk of malnourishment. These are things that the Prime Minister failed to listen to. He failed to listen to the urgency of the need that the residents, their families and the workers in the system were expressing, and the operators also expressed to me how urgent they thought the need to respond to the royal commission recommendations was. Their fear was that if it didn't happen now the opportunity would be lost, and that's what I fear when I see bills like this coming to this place. There were 21 expert reports prior to the royal commission, 21 reports with really practical advice and evidence about what could happen. I want to turn to the issue of workforce, because nothing can happen if the workforce isn't reformed. There has been nothing to improve the wages for overstretched, undervalued aged-care workers, often women, often women who are working in multiple places. Aged-care workers are exhausted, there's no two ways about it, yet they remain extraordinarily resilient. What I often see, when I have had the chance to visit my father, is that it will be time for someone to leave but they'll hear a call from a resident and so, bag in hand, as they're about to walk out the door at the end of a goodness-knows-how-long shift, they'll just drop the stuff. They'll just leave it there and they'll go and attend to the needs of that resident. That's the sort of people they are. They're just not prepared to walk away. As we saw during the pandemic, though, they have lacked resources. I believe these workers need to be paid more and that there should be more of them. One of the things that concern me in the government's response to the royal commission is the gift of $3.2 billion to providers in the form of a basic daily fee increase. We all thought there needed to be an increase in the funding that went to providers, but this one went with no strings attached to ensure that it actually went to care or food, not to management bonuses or a new office fit out. It's not necessarily going to the workers. It's not going to provide more workers so that they have a few more minutes a day to spend with somebody. Nor is it necessarily going to go to better food. A lot of providers are going to do the right thing, but what we saw in the royal commission is that the standards have to be set high so it's not a negotiable thing, so it's not a case of 'maybe we'll do it and maybe we won't'. We have to have standards, standards that we would be happy to accept were we residents. The other major issue with the response from the government to the royal commission is the failure to clear the home-care package waiting list. I've heard my colleagues talk about their constituents who have long, long waiting times before being able to access the care that they have been assessed for and that have been found to require so they can stay in their own home, but they're just simply isn't a package available until someone dies or goes into an aged-care facility. The extra packages that have been included in the budget simply don't add up to fixing the waitlist that exists. That has to be a priority area. When visiting a facility, or if they have someone in a facility, I think a lot of people have an expectation that the issue of having a nurse on shift for 24 hours a day has been fixed. Well, of course, it hasn't been fixed. That recommendation has been ignored and there's no requirement for a nurse to be on duty 24/7 in residential care. That's absolutely at the core of improving clinical care for frail Australians. Firstly, we should be helping people to stay in their homes for as long as they can and for as long as they want to—surrounded by their garden, their pets or all the things that keep them grounded in this world. But if they do go into care they also deserve to have that high level of care. The promise of mandatory care minutes for each resident is completely full of holes. It doesn't meet the royal commission recommendation, and we now know that cleaning and some admin will count as care minutes. Well—that's great. The Morrison government have shown that they can't be trusted to fix aged care. Labor can. We actually care about it and want to see it happen. We have fought for it; we fought for the royal commission and every one of us wants to see older Australians, their families and their carers being treated with respect. This is a government that couldn't be trusted to vaccinate the aged-care workforce; they bungled it so badly that even now I don't think we know exactly how many aged-care workers have been vaccinated. For a long time, the numbers were so opaque. The government can't be trusted to fix the nutrition crisis that people experience in aged care and they can't be trusted to act with urgency on it—we've seen that. They can't be trusted to pay dedicated and hardworking workers properly and fairly, even though I'm sure they recognise how key the workforce is to delivering a high-quality aged-care system. Aged care has always been a priority for Labor. Our workforce compact, which was designed to help fix these issues, was cancelled by then Prime Minister Tony Abbott just weeks after he was elected. That's what we need to judge this government on—not what they say, not the words that come out of their mouths, but on what they do. In aged care, they have failed. 16:40 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I'm delighted to rise and enter the debate tonight about a critical issue facing us all. I'm particularly in strong support of the second reading amendment to the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021, because I want to talk about some of the systemic failures from the perspective of my local communities when it comes to aged care. I also want to talk about the inadequacies that the government has so far delivered in response to the royal commission and I want to raise my voice around the government's failures in providing safe and high-quality care for aged-care residents. Particularly, I want to place on the record the concerns, frustrations and genuine fears of many in my community. In tonight's contribution, I will be referencing the outstanding work of local aged-care workers in my community—the outstanding management and staff who do so much with so little, thanks to this government—and also the impact that some of these changes have meant for the residents who I have spoken to and their families who have contacted me as their advocate in wanting a better deal for those in our community who aren't getting the care that they deserve. We know that action to fix aged care has been a long time coming and that it's needed desperately. Tonight's bill, like much of what the government has provided in this portfolio after eight years, falls woefully short. Several key recommendations from the aged-care royal commission have been neglected and rejected by the government. As we know from previous speakers in today's debate, over 140 recommendations—more than half—will not be implemented fully or at all. This bill claims to be addressing the recommendations from the royal commission, but missing items and alterations that have been made mean this falls far short of what I believe the community expects. The bill does make some small changes, and the proposed measures will impact residential aged-care funding, workforce screening, provider governance, banning orders and a code of conduct. Listening to previous speakers on this side of the chamber and the shadow minister, certainly these recommendations being put forward have been put forward without any adequate consultation with older Australians or any of the aged-care peak bodies. I've been privileged to sit down with a number of providers in my community—and across Australia—who have reached out to me and spoken to me about their sheer frustration with government policy and the sheer frustration of not being heard by the government orby a minister who seems to be either uninterested in or unable to deliver adequate reform. Certainly, from tonight's discussion, policy changes have not had the impact for workers, and, in particular, the unions who represent some of the hardest working Australians—the aged-care nurses, the frontline allied staff, the people who provide round-the-clock care. When United Voice has brought their delegations to the parliament I have always been first in the queue, because I want to hear firsthand from workers. I want to hear their frustrations. I've visited workplaces in my own electorate and heard the sheer desperation and also the heartbreaking stories of workers leaving the sector because of inadequate pay or the fact that they are unable to deal with the complexities—the stress and strain of working in a system that is simply broken. The aged-care crisis, in my opinion, falls firmly at the feet of the Prime Minister. He is responsible for the aged-care system. We need to go a little bit back in time to look at the Prime Minister's record in aged care, particularly when he was Treasurer, where we saw the damaging round of cuts that were made. But, also, there is the fact that he was dragged kicking and screaming to actually get the royal commission done in the first place. It was Labor who called for it, the opposition who rallied and championed a royal commission into this sector. We were told it wasn't necessary. We were told it wouldn't fix things. Well, what the royal commission has highlighted is that our system is broken. We heard during the evidence to the commission about the horrific way that residents have been treated. Regarding the fact that two thirds of residents were malnourished or at risk of malnourishment, I have had experience with this that I would like to share with the chamber. My own mother was in aged care and was rushed to hospital due to malnourishment and dehydration. She had lost around 16 kilos in weight, she had continual UTIs and she was in enormous pain. She was admitted to hospital the week after the last federal election—rushed to hospital when I was visiting her with my cousin. She did make a lengthy recovery but, as a member of parliament and someone who stands in this place, when I look people in the eye to hear their stories, it's heartbreaking to know about the abuse and the difficulties of navigating the aged-care system. When we made the decision, with my mother's involvement, to change facilities, the complexities involved with navigating the system and the difficulties of residential aged-care deposits, the RADs—it was a really difficult period. I can only imagine, for someone with poor literacy skills or someone from a non-English-speaking background, or someone with not a lot of money, what that means in terms of trying to navigate the system. Let's face it, even trying to apply for Meals on Wheels through the My Aged Care portal is a battle. I hope the bureaucrats listening to this speech tonight will take all this into consideration, because the system is not working; the system is broken. With a system that requires so much detail and has so much complexity to navigate, I worry about the future as we all get older—what this means for all of us—because we will all have to face this aged-care system. Certainly, in my time in this place, I'm dedicated to reforming, improving and enhancing this system so that no Australian will have to go through the difficulties that our family went through and that literally thousands and thousands of others have to deal with. I want to make the remark that this is not a reflection of my own personal stance about the quality of care or the difficulties. It was simply the fact that the facilities that I've spoken to—and in our own family's example—did not have enough resources. They didn't have enough time, they didn't have enough care workers, to be able to check meals or to check hydration levels. The staffing levels were not adequate. It's that simple. So we do need durable improvements and lasting reforms that will make a real difference in the lives of our nation's elderly in the long run. As I said, 148 recommendations are not being implemented, or aren't being implemented properly. Nothing will change without reforms to the workforce; I fundamentally believe that. There has been nothing so far to improve the wages of overstretched, undervalued aged-care workers. A couple of weeks ago I was at a local business, a cafe in my local suburb, and I ran into a former aged-care worker. I said to them, 'What are you doing here?'—because they were working at the cafe—and they said they had to leave the facility they were working for because they couldn't make enough money and because of the stress and the strain. That means we've lost the quality and knowledge of that person, in their leaving the sector. The $3.2 billion that the government is coughing up for providers has no strings attached. There are no guarantees that this will go to better care or better food. There are no guarantees that some of this money won't be wasted on management bonuses or fit-outs of new offices or new equipment for the top executives. I don't begrudge anyone decent pay, but you've also got to think about at whose expense that comes—what does that mean for the actual frontline workers in the facilities, who need more support. Older Australians have helped build this country. They've paid their taxes, they've worked hard, they've raised their families and they honestly deserve the respect, dignity and peace of mind that a federal government should be providing to them at an aged-care facility. I know this is a complex piece of policy. I know this is very difficult. But we have to do better for older Australians. We have to do better for the 12,580 pensioners that I represent in this place, with many of them coming to having to deal with tough decisions about what sort of care they have. In my community, I've got wonderful Aveo facilities; I've got Sinnamon Village, which is a terrific facility in the south-western suburbs of Brisbane; there's TriCare at Jindalee—amazing staff, but they are really stretched to the limit, and so many of them have become burnt out. Forest Lake Lodge is another great facility, down from my electorate office. These workers are tireless in their support, and the fact that they've got to come and advocate in their own time to their members of parliament—we should be doing everything we can to support them. And I would say on the record that many of them are begging for help and support. They simply cannot continue the work that they're doing. They love what they do, they love caring for older residents, but they simply do not have the resources to do it. I really hope that the government understands the complexities of this issue and understands how hard it is for older Australians to navigate the current system. We've had 21 expert reports. The then Treasurer, Scott Morrison, now Prime Minister, decided to make those decisions about cutting funding. None of us want to hear the horror stories. None of us want to live the horror stories of what so many residents have gone through. But there is a trust deficit here with the Commonwealth government when it comes to delivering quality aged-care services. It is in black and white. It is as clear as day that, in the system that we have at the moment, the quality of care is not what Australians believe that they are entitled to. After eight years, you have to ask yourself: is the government up to the task? After eight long years and a royal commission, half the recommendations of which have not been implemented, you have to ask: is this federal government shaping up to be one of the worst governments in our nation's history, full of dysfunction and chaos—and that's just this week? Each week we seem to go from bad to worse, with someone being held hostage or some sort of Hunger Games episode inside the government where someone is being held to ransom about a policy issue or someone threatens to resign, walk out or cross the floor. The real losers out of this are older Australians, the residents who are fearful, but also their families. Particularly during the pandemic, there has been the issue of isolation. I won't even get onto what the member for Macquarie touched on in her speech: the issue of vaccination and all the promises that were made by the health minister. I would sit in this parliament and hear the excuses about 16 per cent, 72 per cent, four per cent or nine per cent. 'We just didn't do our job. We promised that, in every facility, every aged-care worker would be done by Easter, and that turned into May, June and July.' On and on it went. No-one from the government ever got up and said: 'We stuffed up. We didn't order enough vaccines. We didn't deliver what we said we would.' Maybe if they had there'd be a bit more confidence in the aged-care sector. But that was during the pandemic. The government does have an opportunity now, in the dying days of this term, to do better when it comes to aged care. If they don't, older Australians have a very clear choice at the next election: they can continue on with a government not committed to aged care or to real reform, or they can elect a future Albanese Labor government with, hopefully, Minister Mark Butler—currently the shadow minister—who will deliver and will see real reform to give older Australians the respect, dignity and kindness that they deserve. 16:57 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton [by video link] I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021. Like the earlier speakers, I do so through the prism of having helped people in my electorate go through the aged-care maze but also having dealt more recently with my elderly father, with all of the complications that come with that. This legislation is part of the second stage of the Morrison government response to the final recommendations of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety. It implements eight measures. This inquiry has confirmed that our nation's aged-care system is broken. The first report of the royal commission was bluntly and accurately entitled Neglect, and barely anything has improved since. Of course, Labor supports action to fix the aged-care system. We're frustrated that it has taken the Morrison government as long as it has to get to this point. This is a crisis, and we are concerned that, yet again, the Morrison government will fall short when it comes to taking real action in a crisis. Don't listen to the Prime Minister's words; judge his deeds. When the Black Summer bushfires almost turned the east coast of Australia to ash, what did the Prime Minister do? He bunked off to Hawaii. When the COVID-19 pandemic emerged in 2020, the Morrison government took too long to react. Labor called for wage subsidies, but the Prime Minister said it was dangerous and dragged his heels. Eventually he agreed to wage subsidies, but they should have started much earlier. Vaccines were eventually ordered, but not enough. He said we were at the front of the queue, but the queue snaked so far back around the block that he didn't realise we were actually last rather than about to enter the vaccination doorway. We see it again and again from the bloke who has been lolling around in The Lodge since he pushed Malcolm Turnbull down the stairs. Since August 2018 we've seen a lack of leadership when it comes to acting in a crisis, and we've certainly seen this in the aged-care sector since the coalition took office in 2013. The Morrison government has ignored key recommendations from the aged-care royal commission. Over half of the 148 recommendations are either being ignored or not implemented. I knew there was a problem because my constituents have been telling me so. Here are a few emails I've received from my constituents about their aged-care experiences. One wrote: My father is a tradesperson and ran a successful company for most of his working life. He started work after completing his national service and without a break he was still actively working part time at age 80. Surely he is entitled to live out the remainder of his life in the way that he chooses? Given the appropriate level of care then this should be possible. Sadly though this is not the case. As Dad's daughter I am his advocate. I am sure that he would not even be getting this level of support if I had not pursued this on his behalf. Another constituent wrote: Sadly, no one seems to have learnt a thing from the Royal Commission and the situation in the centre was too terrible and quite traumatic for my Mum. I got to know some of the other residents while visiting my Mum, and they weren't as lucky as they had no one to stand up for them while they were being treated so dismally. It would be great if there would be someone to stand up and make a change within the aged care community. Yet another said: Our families' only concern is our parents care, motivation and well-being to improve their quality of life. My main concern is the staffing to provide the highest quality of care that all residents deserve. On many occasions there are no staff at ward D our parents nursing station. Minimum staffing requirements are absolutely essential because without staff, workers become tired and stressed and can't provide the best outcomes for residents. My mother walked out of the facility recently and was luckily picked up by a good samaritan and dropped at a local hospital where I was then contacted. The door alarm would have been activated but no staff were in the ward to hear the alarm. Also the quality of food is of concern, one evening I stayed with my parents for dinner. They were given a hamburger which they didn't eat and their meal didn't appeal to me either. Variety of healthy, tasty and appealing food is essential. There should be food control random inspections. I consider my parents are in one of the better residences compared to what I have seen but there are always improvements that can be made. And, finally, one constituent set out some particular issues with the facility their loved one resides at: 1. MEDICATION INCIDENTS There have been several incidents with medications. These have included: •   wrong medications being dispensed •   wrong medications being ingested •   medications being missed completely •   time critical medication not being dispensed in a timely manner after several requests by Dad to have his medication 2. BED LINEN NOT BEING CHANGED 3. PERSONAL MEDICAL EQUIPMENT NOT BEING PROPERLY CLEANED 4. URINE POURED DOWN VANITY SINK 5. ADVOCACY •   If Dad passes before Mum, there is no longer someone on-site to advocate on her behalf. This constituent continued with some suggestions which are relevant to this debate today: These may seem like small issues to some, but for people who have to live with these problems on a daily basis, it is simply not good enough. Families are paying a lot of money for very average, and in some cases, below average care. Minimum staffing numbers need to be set by governments. Care workers need to be more skilled. Care residents deserve to be heard and validated. Has anyone gone into Aged Care and actually spoken to the residents themselves? How about someone dignify them by asking THEM what needs to change? I said that these comments are relevant, because older Australians, aged-care peak bodies, providers, workers and unions were not consulted in the drafting of this bill before the chamber. I know that seems unbelievable, but it is true. The Morrison government did not consult with any of those groups before this bill was drafted, despite the impacts it will have on older Australians residing in aged-care facilities. The providers, workers, unions and peak bodies—none of them were consulted yet all of them will be impacted. Some of the changes in the bill include residential aged-care funding, workforce screening, provider governance, banning orders, and a code of conduct—not small changes at all! People involved in the sector would have had an opinion about these changes. Frontline workers may think that the measures in this bill are great although, equally, they may think that there are some practical concerns that the Morrison government has not taken into account appropriately. Their contribution may have improved this bill. At the very least, the aged-care sector deserves to have a say. Sadly, the Abbott-Truss, Turnbull-Truss, Turnbull-Joyce, Turnbull-McCormack, Morrison-McCormack and Morrison-Joyce governments never listen to the experts. They have had 21 expert reports that told them older people were suffering in aged care and they still can't fix the problem. Not only did they not fix the problem, when the current Prime Minister was Treasurer, he cut funding to aged care. When he was just three months into the job as Treasurer he booked a $472 million saving to be 'redirected by the government to repair the budget and fund policy priorities'. So that was a decision of the then minister—the then Treasurer Morrison. This money was found by freezing the indexation of the aged-care funding instrument and by making it harder for providers to make claims under the subsidy. The next year Minister Morrison raided the funding instrument again, finding a further $1.2 billion. The budget papers said that 'savings from this measure will be redirected by the government'. As far as aged care was concerned, the money vanished. As Rick Morton has detailed, according to one registered nurse with more than 30 years experience in aged care, the $1.7 billion that Minister Morrison broke off the funding instrument brought the sector to its knees. So this aged-care crisis is the current Prime Minister's aged-care crisis. Mr Morrison is responsible for the aged-care system and why it is currently a national disgrace. The Morrison government's response to the royal commission fails to deliver enduring improvements or any lasting reforms. A skilled workforce in aged care is crucial—everybody knows that. The government have done nothing to improve wages for overworked and undervalued aged-care workers. The Morrison government are giving $3.2 billion to providers but with no strings attached. They won't be requiring that the taxpayer money goes to more care or to better food, things that would directly improve the lives of people in aged care. What could possibly go wrong? The Morrison government have failed to clear the home-care package waitlist of 100,000. They have failed to implement the commission's recommendation that a nurse be on duty 24/7 in residential care. That's such an important, life-saving recommendation and yet the Morrison government just blithely ignore it. The royal commission recommended a mandatory amount of care minutes for each resident in care. The Morrison government's version of implementing this recommendation allows cleaning and admin to be included as care minutes. They failed to roll out vaccinations for the aged-care workforce in an ordered and timely manner, and still don't know accurately how many aged-care workers have been vaccinated. The Morrison government just can't be trusted to fix the aged-care system, and older Australians deserve better. Older Australians built this country. They deserve better than a system that is unsafe, undignified and chaotic. Labor believes that aged-care workers should be paid more; we know that will flow into better conditions for the people who they care for. This would also help to recruit more staff—another issue confronting the sector, especially while international borders are closed. Older Australians and their families should not have to choose between unsafe care or no care. Sadly, the Morrison government cannot be trusted to fix aged care. Only an Albanese Labor government will reverse the neglect and make sure that everyone's loved ones are safer. 17:08 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021. Just listening to the member for Moreton, it occurred to me that some things need to be put in context. The first of those is that the so-called 'cuts' he referred to were not cuts at all. They were the efforts by this government to stop the growth in expenditure in aged care. Why did we do that? We did that because there are now three listed aged-care companies—SDR, Japara and Regis—who in all their prospectuses stated that their sustainable competitive advantage, compared with their competitors, was that they were better at filling out forms and gaming the system of funding that the federal government had instituted to maximise the amount of money that they got from the Australian taxpayer. So when I listened to the member for Moreton speak so eloquently, as he always does, about the needs of those people who are not wealthy, those people who do not have access to unsustainable riches and class-action lawyers and industry super and big unions, I was left to wonder why all of a sudden he is in favour of very wealthy listed companies in Melbourne getting access to untold riches from the taxpayer and this parliament not being in a position to ask whether they deserve it and whether they are actually providing the care. Is that the sort of deep moral and intellectual bankruptcy we are to expect from the opposition on every issue this parliament deals with—that they would favour the interests of large listed corporations over that of people seeking care in aged care and nursing homes? Is that where we've got to in this parliament? Is that where we've got to in this country? (Quorum formed) Surprise, surprise! The Labor Party wants to shut down debate when we start talking about ideas—when we start talking about the endemic corruption of industry super, big unions and class-action lawyers. They are afraid of ideas. The member for Fenner talks and talks about ideas, but he doesn't want to hear the ones he needs to listen to. And I'm really surprised that the member for Moreton don't want us to ensure that taxpayer funds go to caring for people. Before I came to this place, I had a business that provided goods and services to the aged-care sector. That business started roughly in 2004. My observations between 2004 and 2016 were that aged care in Australia actually became outstanding. I would go to trade shows in the healthcare sector in places like Germany, China and Taiwan—it was nothing compared to the locations that James Bond went to!—and I heard people from every part of the world talking about aged care and the challenges that their nations faced. It is little known in this place that Germany has a proactive policy of relocating people who require care as they grow older. They have a policy that enables people to be cared for in the Czech Republic and in Thailand, because they simply do not have the resources or the people to enable them to undertake that care in Germany. China has a very large number of people about to get very old. Traditionally what happened in Chinese society was that those people would be looked after in the homes of their children. But of course, under the communist regime, there has been 40 years of a one-child policy, which means that this traditional care model for people in China as they become older has broken down. So the Chinese government is looking for potential solutions for what they see as a crisis on their doorstep, a demographic crisis. When they've looked around the rest of the world, they have found that, in their view, Australia has one of the best systems in the world for caring for people as they get older. I think back to 2004 when I walked into my first aged-care home, which was a UnitingCare aged-care home in Croydon, and, as the doors opened, the smell of ammonia that escaped was overpowering. I remember, at a Royal Freemasons home in Parramatta, walking past a lady who was quite distressed because she had been calling for care for quite some period of time. But, as the private sector came into the provision of aged care, quality and service went through the roof. I think of Arcare— An honourable member: An outstanding company. Mr FALINSKI G86 an outstanding company, a company that really makes me wonder, as a sprightly 51-year-old, whether it would be okay for me to move into one of their facilities at Warriewood. I think of Signature Care, which is providing four- and five-star quality care in rural and regional settings that many of the not-for-profit providers, whether it be UnitingCare or otherwise, simply are not dedicating the resources to providing. These organisations are providing incredibly good quality care in terms of the services that they provide. I think personally, from my observation, that the group that has done more to stop older Australians, our tribal elders, from getting the care they deserve is in fact this parliament. We have heaped regulation after regulation after regulation onto aged care so that innovative, entrepreneurial people who take caring seriously, take compassion for older people as their calling in life, have been prevented from providing different care, more care, services that people want, by this parliament, who have decided that the smartest 151 people in the world actually sit in this chamber and we are so smart that we can tell you what care a person in Broome requires versus a person in the south of Hobart, that we know that model of care from one end of this country to the other. But the truth is we don't. We don't. The people who the member for Moreton talked about, the people who are engaged on a daily basis in the provision of this care, know better than any of us ever will what an individual needs, requires and should have to ensure the last years of their life are some of the most satisfying that they can have—or, at least, are satisfying. When this parliament—and I was part of that vote—referred the aged-care sector to a royal commission to investigate the problems that some aged-care providers were having, I have to say this thought went through my mind: can you think of a group less suited to undertake this investigation than lawyers—who are known for their care and compassion!—opining on the entirety of the aged-care system in this country, a system that is globally seen as one of the best in the world, one that other nations want to replicate? But so it came to pass. Those opposite say, 'The government isn't interested or aren't accepting all the recommendations of the royal commission.' Let me tell you why. The two commissioners themselves disagreed. You had the Chief Medical Officer of Australia sitting in front of them saying, 'These are all the plans we had during COVID,' and then they had the counsel assisting saying, 'Oh, you didn't explain; there was no plan,' which was just not true. Simply put, it was not true. So now we have this report that has come from a royal commission staffed by a bunch of lawyers. The member for Moreton asked how many people have spent time in aged-care homes. Well, I'll put my hand up. I have spent a lot of time in aged care. I have seen the best and the worst providers of aged care throughout this land, and I know that the people who have been able to provide better care have been the private sector coming into this market and reimagining what it should look like. The people who have prevented them from providing even better care than that are this parliament, because we've told them what they can and cannot do from Canberra rather than say we do not know. The member for Moreton said the government has rejected provisions like 24-hour nursing. Let me tell you why we did that. We did that because there are small towns dotted throughout this country who, if you brought in that provision, would lose their nursing home. In other words, the people who want to be close to their loved ones—their wives, their husbands—in the last few years they have on this planet would not be able to access an aged-care home if this parliament decided, 'No, you cannot have a perfectly good, caring environment for your husband or your wife because you can't find a nurse to work 24-hours,' even though you don't need a nurse, even though you're highly unlikely to ever require one. We should endorse this bill and we should vote for it, but, most of all, we should support the best aged-care sector in the world. (Time expired) 17:24 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021. This bill addresses eight aspects of the report of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, including residential aged-care funding, screening of aged-care workers, code of conduct and banning orders, incident management, governance, and information sharing. It also establishes the Independent Health and Aged Care Pricing Authority. It will be associated with some $200 million of additional funding for the sector and oversight bodies. There are 11 recommendations from the royal commission that are addressed by this bill, and I note that the peak bodies of the aged-care sector have expressed their dismay at the lack of consultation with them on the changes presented in this bill. I would encourage the government to improve on its process of consultation with the experts within the field, especially with those who are impacted by the changes, in advance of further reform. One would think that the lesson had already been learnt with the outcomes of the royal commission and the horrendous stories that shocked the Australian public, but there is still an inability for proper consultation with the sector when addressing reforms. This is particularly relevant to the new pricing model proposed under the legislation, the impact of which remains unclear. Some providers fear that they may be worse off under the new funding arrangements, but the government has refused to establish a better-off-overall-test for this new funding model, which is a concern. I welcome the adaptation of the NDIS worker-screening model to the aged-care sector. However, given the nuances of the two sectors, I believe it would be beneficial if aged-care providers were able to provide input and feedback on the screening process. Schedule 3 of the bill establishes a code of conduct and banning orders for aged-care staff. While this is a welcome development, I note that peak bodies, such as Leading Age Services Australia, have significant concerns with the broad and vague terms of the code of conduct and the high penalties of up to $55,000 for breaches. These penalties may even be levied against volunteers. Their concern is that it is easy for different people to have different views about what 'acting with respect' means. The detail is important. They are also concerned that the code of conduct is duplicative in many instances because nurses and other allied health professionals will be subject to the aged-care code in addition to the relevant codes for their profession. The question will be: are they aligned or will there be discrepancies? The new governance requirements established by schedule 5 of the bill make sense for larger organisations, including having a majority of non-executive members and a minimum number of clinical members. However, again, smaller owner-operated bodies may struggle to comply with these new requirements. I appreciate that exemptions may be granted, but I strongly believe it would be better to have more-specific guidance in the legislation or regulations around arrangements for different entity structures. Overall, I welcome the bill and the progress towards implementation of the aged-care royal commission recommendations. The bill and the establishment of the code of conduct, governance and screening models will make some progress towards the complaints of aged-care workers in my electorate and those around Australia. But we still have a number of concerns from local nurses and aged-care workers. Aged-care workers in my electorate have highlighted to me the lack of training and oversight of carers, leading to compromised quality of care service among those providers. They've told me that there is a real gap in the care received by participants, depending on the carers allocated. Patients without family or close relationships or under public guardianship are often left behind with inadequate support. They have alerted me to instances of long waiting times for assistance, of poor hygiene in facilities and in the home and of staff administering medication to control behaviour. These stories are not unfamiliar. Many of them we heard during the royal commission. This bill and the standards and conduct measures will go some way towards improving the conditions, but more needs to be done. We need to recruit and train the 40,000 additional workers promised to the sector. We need those additional staff urgently to improve the timeliness and quality of care for those most vulnerable in our society. Registered nurses remains a vexed question. There's still an unwillingness to address this issue. Registered nurses in my electorate who work in this sector—and, as the member for Mackellar said, they are the ones on the ground, who are doing the work—strongly believe that having a registered nurse allocation 24/7 to all residential facilities will greatly improve the quality of care outcomes for residents and other staff and reduce pressure on hospitals and emergency services. It is not good enough to claim an excuse that some areas in regional areas won't have access. We need to make sure we train the workforce and make registered nurses available to facilities. There should not be a difference in standard of care. We need to progress the requirement to have registered nurses on staff at residential aged-care facilities at all times. It makes sense, and it will improve the quality of care and outcomes for our already stretched health systems. This needs to be prioritised. It's important for me, as the member for Warringah, to hear from families, from people participating in aged care and engaging with the system, and from professionals in that system. So I recently implemented a Warringah aged-care forum to hear from them directly. Implementation of the aged-care royal commission recommendations was a key issue raised at that forum. In my electorate of Warringah, there are 18 residential aged-care facilities. The purpose of the forum was to allow my constituents to raise their concerns and ask for guidance and assistance and for me to give them practical steps from an expert in the industry, as well as to hear their complaints and concerns. The main themes that arose out of the forum were difficulties in navigating the application and assessment processes; questions about how to instigate either home care or residential aged care; the need to alert people to the option of the Commonwealth home support package, which can often be used as an interim support while people are on these very long waiting lists; and guidance on choosing a provider or aged-care facility, as well as other community resources that may help. The key issues raised included the very long waiting lists; convoluted and arduous application and assessment processes; the need to have a registered nurse on staff at residential care facilities 24/7, whereas at present there is no obligation to have a registered nurse on site at aged-care facilities at all times; the need to improve carer and staff ratios dramatically, because the statistics are horrific; the need for families to have pre-emptive contingency plans in place to prepare for abrupt changes in circumstances; guidance on estate planning and end-of-life preparations and assisting families on how to navigate these; and how and when the royal commission's recommendations would be implemented in full. These are the key concerns of residents of Warringah. So I welcome this bill, as it progresses 11 recommendations of the royal commission. But, unfortunately, many of the concerns voiced by my constituents in the forum won't be directly addressed by this bill. I've written to the minister to raise the issues that came up in the forum, and I hope these will be engaged with and there will be some action in that respect. The bill lays some of the groundwork for improvements to the sector, but we need more progress on the implementation of the royal commission recommendations, including the establishment of staff ratios and registered nurses. This is probably one of the single biggest changes that could occur to improve the very real outcomes and the actual care of our most vulnerable. We need government to commit to removing the age discrimination between the packages provided to people who acquire disabilities under the age of 65 and those who acquire them over 65. This is the big elephant in the room. It just doesn't get addressed by the government. It's a bucket that keeps getting pushed around. It's incredible discrimination that's still allowed to persist. While you're adapting so many compliance and standard measures from the NDIS to the aged-care sector, you should also make sure that the packages provided to participants are equitable and fair. So I commend the government for implementing some of these measures, but I urge the minister and the government to listen to the professionals in the industry and implement more of the recommendations. We know Australia has an ageing population, and we need to do more to ensure that those most vulnerable are properly cared for in their old age. It is our responsibility, and it's the responsibility of everyone in this place. 17:33 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo Following release of the final report of the Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, the government has committed to reforms in the aged-care system. These overarching reforms can't come soon enough. For my older constituents, for their families and carers, and for workers in aged care who put in so much effort, these reforms need to happen now. I'm pleased to hear from the government that the new research based model for calculating residential aged-care subsidies, the Australian National Aged Care Classification, will be designed to take into account additional costs for those who provide services to vulnerable groups and for small regional providers, such as those in my electorate, who face additional challenges to sustainability compared to those in the metropolitan areas. While I await the report of the committee, I am in favour of the establishment of a nationally consistent preemployment screening and code of conduct for workers in aged care, aligned with those for workers in the disability sector. However, almost a third of these workers are estimated to be working across both aged care and the disability sectors. This, again, begs the very pertinent question of why aged-care workers are paid up to 25 per cent less than those who provide support to people living with a disability. Both are doing vital work and important work, and their efforts should be valued and paid equally. I call on the government, as I have before in this House, to support the work value case to this effect before the Fair Work Commission right now. It would do tremendous good for the government to support this application. The extension of the residential care Serious Incident Response Scheme to home and flexible care to provide equivalent protections to those receiving aged care at home or in community settings from the middle of next year is also a sensible measure. New governance and reporting requirements for approved providers of aged care are also welcomed. We do need to take this opportunity to ensure sound governance and reporting form the bedrock for a new aged-care system. I, therefore, urge the government to provide for better reporting on related party transactions, staff hours, make-up, complaints, food and nutrition, particularly given the increased funding to providers for this purpose and charges levied for administration and management opposed to the direct provision of care. I understand the carveout included in this bill, based on consultation with consumer peak bodies, is designed to help those providers with fewer than five governing body members and 40 consumers manage the impact of new governance requirements. This should help to ensure that smaller regional providers, for example, are not overwhelmed, which could push older residents to find care further from their communities. I'm pleased to see the facilitation of greater information sharing in relation to noncompliance of providers and workers between Commonwealth bodies across aged care, disability and veteran affairs sectors, with appropriate safeguards in place. Improved powers to request information or documents from a provider or borrower regarding refundable accommodation deposits with an extended five-year period of liability for misuse of such deposits are indeed welcome. I've discussed with Senator the Hon. Richard Colbeck, the Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services, how such concerns can be flagged to consumers earlier so that they are present at the point of sanction. This should be another area where prospective residents of aged care are ensured access to all of the information they need to choose their residential aged-care provider. Beyond the measures of this bill, I don't believe a person should be charged up to half of their home-care package in management and administration fees. I will therefore be asking members in this place to support my bill to cap those administration and management fees, to ban exit fees and to increase transparency on pricing information for providers. I await the report of the committee before indicating Centre Alliance's formal position for this bill. I urge the government to do more to implement the recommendations of the royal commission and to work with all members in this chamber to deliver an aged-care system that truly has older Australians at its heart. There are a couple of other issues that I would like to mention. One of those, which was also mentioned by the member for Warringah, was one of the recommendations of the royal commission, and that was to ensure people who are over 65 years of age who acquire a disability are not discriminated on based on their age. Right now, if you are 64 and you break your neck, you can access NDIS; if you are 66 and you fall over and break your neck, the best you can have is a level 4 package of My Aged Care, and that does not provide the level of support needed to ensure someone can stay at home. It is a huge gap in policy and one that we must address as a matter of urgency. We also need to address the lack of dental care support for people who are pensioners. Dental issues account for around a third of preventable hospital admissions in our nation. We have to keep working on this royal commission and making sure that all of the recommendations are implemented; we can't allow the findings to sit gathering dust on a shelf. I would urge that we form a joint committee of both houses with people from right across the parliament—essentially, a working group—to make sure that we can continue to put older Australians and the needs of older Australians front and centre and in this place. 17:40 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I rise to speak on the Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021. The royal commission into aged care revealed what can only be described as a national disgrace. At some level, I think that every Australian would feel ashamed of what was revealed. And that report was also a report card on this government. The royal commission saw fit to call the report Neglect. It comes after eight years of attacks, budget after budget, on pensioners in this country. The government is in its ninth year and I think the Prime Minister is hoping that the nation might experience collective amnesia, not just about his failures on vaccine and quarantine but for the fact that this Prime Minister was actually the Minister for Social Services and was the Treasurer who cut $2 billion from aged care. He's now pretending he didn't do it. He forgets actually that TV cameras record stuff that you say and that budget papers can be accessed from history, year after year. He forgets these things, that Australians can actually look at his record and judge him on his record. It was also this government, in the shadow of COVID, which cut Medicare rebates. These were sneaky little cuts introduced in July to hip, hand and shoulder surgeries, further hurting senior Australians. It is this government's plan to force age pensioners onto the cashless credit card, creating the cashless pension card if they win the election. The attacks on pensioners and senior Australians never stop with this mob. But the aged-care record is an absolute disgrace and it should, as I said, appal every Australian at some level. Neglect: maggots crawling out of wounds left untreated; nearly 50 per cent of senior Australians in care not receiving enough nourishment and food; using drugs to sedate people because there weren't enough staff to provide adequate care; staff not paid a living wage across most of the country; and 28,000 senior Australians dying while waiting for a home-care package at the right level. I note, from talking to my electorate, that many are too scared to go into aged care, so run down has the system become in the ninth year of this government. The government know this; they can't get up and blame Labor or the states, because it's their ninth year in office. It was this Prime Minister that cut billions of dollars from the aged-care sector, further driving down the quality of the system. There were 21 expert reports this government had before the royal commission that they failed to act on. The royal commission should have been a watershed moment, a moment of national unity and with a determination right across this parliament and the country finally to act. But what have we got from this government? It's a weak, half response that's an insult to older Australians who built this country. Of the 148 recommendations from the royal commission, the government has not even responded to around 50 per cent of them—or did not respond in any adequate fashion. This bill here implements a few of their responses; just a few. It's the sort of response you have when you don't actually care and you just want to try to do enough so you have some talking points and people think you're doing something. You kick the can down the road, thinking that you'll probably lose the election and that it will be Labor's fault somehow and that you can blame us for their nine years of neglect and mess. The recommendation from the royal commission—and you wouldn't think this is rocket science, even for this mob—said that there should be a nurse on duty in a nursing home for 24 hours a day. Maybe 'nursing' home is the clue here! The royal commission said to have a nurse in a nursing home 24/7. The government hasn't responded: just silence, nothing to say. Aged-care workers across the country are exhausted, overstretched and underresourced. We saw in the pandemic that they lacked resources through the Commonwealth's failed response in Victoria last year. That led to hundreds of unnecessary deaths. The government didn't have a plan and then, when they scrambled for a plan, they couldn't even implement their own plan. And the workers are underpaid. The government's response? Nothing to improve wages, nothing. They gave $3.2 billion of taxpayer funding to the private nursing home providers with no strings attached—not a guarantee that it would flow through to adequate food or do anything to boost wages; just a present. Aged-care workers do a wonderful job in incredibly difficult circumstances—it is not work that I could do—and they get very little pay. Frankly, part of that is because it is a female dominated industry. Can you imagine if this was a male dominated industry—if people would put up with aged-care workers and indeed early childhood workers, in these female dominated industries, being paid less than people stacking supermarket shelves? I've got nothing against people who stack supermarket shelves—also critical work—but we need to value these caring professions just as highly. Labor believes that more funding is needed to provide these workers with a living wage. This bill is flawed. Stakeholders complain of a lack of consultation. The government, after introducing their own bill, even before it has left this House and got to the Senate, are introducing amendments to their own bill because they know it is flawed and they have made mistakes. The government are choosing to implement worker screening instead of the royal commission's recommended national registration scheme. There are weaker governance standards than the royal commission recommended—one of those half responses—and we've got this little freedom of information exemption. Currently providers are exempted from FOI, from families being able to find out what has really gone on with their loved ones. The royal commission recommended that this exemption be removed, but that's not in the government's bill. Major amendments are going to be needed to this bill in the Senate. Older Australians deserve better. They built this country. They and their families who love them deserve better than this unsafe, chaotic aged-care system under this Morrison government. People have a right to expect that the government will support them decently in their frailer years and ensure a system that doesn't neglect people in the way we have seen. This issue impacts everyone—this shame of the government's neglect of aged care—whether it's senior Australians in care, older Australians looking down the next decade or so and thinking, 'What happens to me?' or people who are worried about their parents and grandchildren who worried about their grandparents. All of us hope to be old one day, because the alternative is an early death. My mother died some years ago in palliative care. I nursed her at home for 10 months. It was one of the greatest privileges of my life. Indeed, I believe one of the greatest privileges of anyone's life is helping someone who you really love to die with dignity. I learnt first hand just how special the people who care in these circumstances are, the palliative care nurses. My mum was a nurse. I remember the conversation. She said to me when we were chatting: 'Darling, I'm sad to be dying a bit too soon. I'm only 70. But, on the bright side, one of the blessings is you won't have to worry about me with dementia and I won't have to think about going into care or a nursing home and trying to dodge a bullet and find one with decent care.' I don't want other Australians to ever feel that way in the future—that they should see an upside in an early death at 70 because they are too scared of what awaits them in the Morrison government's aged-care system. This bill does not fix the problems. It does not address the royal commission 's findings. It does none of that. It's a half-baked response—I won't say the half 'a' word, but you know what I mean, Deputy Speaker—from a government that do not care. They are in their ninth year. They've failed senior Australians. They attack them budget after budget. This bill is an insult, and I condemn the government for it. (Quorum formed) 17:52 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein The Aged Care and Other Legislation Amendment (Royal Commission Response No. 2) Bill 2021 implements eight measures to deliver the second stage of aged-care reform in response to the royal commission and to ensure senior Australians receive high-quality and safe care. The bill introduces new subsidy calculation methods to fund approved providers to replace the outdated funding instrument and encourage innovation and investment in the aged-care sector. It establishes authority for pre-employment screening for the aged-care workforce and provides authority for an enforceable code of conduct and banning audits. These new regulatory arrangements will work together to effectively manage and prevent unsuitable workers from entering or remaining in aged care and the broader care and support sector, and will ensure approved providers and their workers, in governing persons, are held to account for their behaviour. The bill extends the serious incident response scheme from residential care to home services to reduce the risk of neglect and to protect vulnerable senior Australians receiving aged-care services in their home and in the community. The bill also introduces strengthened provider governance arrangements to improve the transparency and accountability of providers, and will change the culture from the top down. Replacing the current disqualified individual arrangements with a suitability test will bring further regulatory alignment with the National Disability Insurance Scheme. The bill will facilitate the sharing of information among relevant prescribed Commonwealth bodies about providers and workers operating across the care and support sector who may not be complying with their obligations. Regulatory alignment in this area will improve the consistency of quality and provide safer protections across the aged-care and support sector while reducing the overall regulatory burden on cross-sector providers. Increased financial and prudential oversight will build the sector's financial resilience and improve its accountability, and the expanded functions of the Independent Hospital and Aged Care Pricing Authority will support transparency and evidence based assessment of the costs involved in delivering care. These amendments have been developed as a result of significant consultation directly with stakeholders as well as through the extensive consultation undertaken during the royal commission. I thank members for their contributions to the debate on this bill. The health, safety and wellbeing of senior Australians is of utmost importance to the government and is driving our plan for the generational reform of the aged-care system. I commend the bill to the House. The SPEAKER 00APG The original question was that this bill now be read a second time. To this, the honourable member for Cowper has moved 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.    

The House divided. [17:59]
(The Speaker—Hon. Tony Smith)

 56 AYES Alexander, J. G. Allen, K. J. Andrews, K. J. Andrews, K. L. Bell, A. M. Buchholz, S. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Connelly, V. G. Coulton, M. M. Drum, D. K. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Entsch, W. G. Falinski, J. G. Fletcher, P. W. Frydenberg, J. A. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Hamilton, G. R. Hammond, C. M. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Hunt, G. A. Joyce, B. T. G. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Martin, F. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. Morton, B O'Dowd, K. D. Pasin, A. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Sharma, D. N. Steggall, Z. Stevens, J. Sukkar, M. S. Taylor, A. J. Tudge, A. E. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Wallace, A. B. Webster, A. E. Wicks, L. E. Wilson, R. J. Wilson, T. R. Wood, J. P. Wyatt, K. G. Zimmerman, T. M. 51 NOES Albanese, A. N. Bandt, A. P. Bird, S. L. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Chesters, L. M. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Dick, D. M. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Freelander, M. R. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Haines, H. M. Hayes, C. P. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Leigh, A. K. Marles, R. D. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. O'Connor, B. P. J. Owens, J. A. Payne, A. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. (Teller) Sharkie, R. C. C. Shorten, W. R. Smith, D. P. B. Snowdon, W. E. Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilson, J. H. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Original question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Messages from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for the bill and proposed amendments announced.

 Consideration in Detail 103 18:03 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum to the bill. By leave—I move: (1) Clause 2, page 2 (at the end of the table), add: 11. Schedule 9         The day after this Act receives the Royal Assent. (2) Schedule 1, page 10 (after line 4), after item 37, insert: 37A Subsection 44-21(2) (Care subsidy reduction calculator, step 4, paragraphs (a) and (b)) Repeal the paragraphs, substitute: (a) the adjusted basic subsidy amount for the care recipient for the day (see subsection (6A)); (b) any primary supplement amounts for the care recipient for the day. 37B Subsection 44-21(2) (Care subsidy reduction calculator, step 5, paragraphs (a) and (b)) Repeal the paragraphs, substitute: (a) the adjusted basic subsidy amount for the care recipient for the day (see subsection (6A)); (b) any primary supplement amounts for the care recipient for the day. 37C Subsection 44-21(3) Omit all the words after "care subsidy reduction", substitute: for a day is the total of the following amounts: (a) the adjusted basic subsidy amount for the care recipient for the day (see subsection (6A)); (b) any primary supplement amounts for the care recipient for the day. 37D After subsection 44-21(6) Insert: (6A) The adjusted basic subsidy amount for a care recipient for a day is an amount: (a) determined by the Minister by legislative instrument; or (b) worked out in accordance with a method determined by the Minister by legislative instrument. (3) Schedule 1, items 40 and 41, page 10 (lines 11 to 25), omit the items. (4) Schedule 1, item 71, page 14 (lines 22 to 25), omit the item, substitute: 71 Subsection 44-21(3) (Income tested reduction calculator, step 4, paragraph (c)) Repeal the paragraph (not including the note), substitute: (c) the subsidy related amount for a care recipient for a day (see subsection (4)). 71A At the end of section 44-21 Add: (4) The subsidy related amount for a care recipient for a day is the total of the following amounts: (a) the adjusted basic subsidy amount for the care recipient for the day (see subsection (5)); (b) the amounts of any primary supplements worked out using Subdivision 44-C for the care recipient for the day; less the amounts of any reductions in subsidy worked out using Subdivision 44-D for the care recipient for the day. (5) The adjusted basic subsidy amount for a care recipient for a day is an amount: (a) determined by the Minister by legislative instrument; or (b) worked out in accordance with a method determined by the Minister by legislative instrument. 71B Paragraph 44-23(4)(b) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (b) the subsidy related amount worked out under subsection 44-21(4) for the care recipient for that day. (5) Schedule 1, items 80 and 81, page 16 (line 30) to page 17 (line 17), omit the items. (6) Schedule 1, item 90, page 20 (after line 10), after paragraph (1)(c), insert: (ca) section 44-21; (7) Schedule 1, item 90, page 20 (line 24), omit paragraph (3)(f), substitute: (f) section 44-21; (fa) paragraph 44-23(4)(b); (8) Schedule 1, page 25 (after line 15), after item 97, insert: 97A Saving — care subsidy reduction under the Aged Care Act Despite the amendments of section 44-21 of the Aged Care Act made by the amending Part, that section, as in force immediately before the commencement day, continues to apply, on and after that day, in relation to a payment period that starts before that day. 97B Saving — daily income tested reduction under the Transitional Act Despite the amendments of section 44-21 and paragraph 44-23(4)(b) of the Transitional Act made by the amending Part, those provisions, as in force immediately before the commencement day, continue to apply, on and after that day, in relation to a payment period that starts before that day. (9) Schedule 1, items 99 and 100, page 25 (line 28) to page 26 (line 10), omit the items, substitute: 99 Application — maximum daily amount of resident fees on or after the commencement day under the Aged Care Act Section 52C-5 of the Aged Care Act, as amended by the amending Part, applies in relation to a day that is on or after the commencement day. 100 Saving — maximum daily amount of resident fees for a day that is before the commencement day under the Aged Care Act Despite the amendment of section 52C-5 of the Aged Care Act made by the amending Part, that section, as in force immediately before the commencement day, continues to apply, on and after that day, in relation to a day that is before the commencement day. (10) Schedule 5, item 16, page 71 (lines 8 to 24), omit subsections 63-1D(3) and (4), substitute: (3) Subsection (2) does not apply in relation to an approved provider at a particular time if both of the following apply at that time: (a) the *governing body of the provider has fewer than 5 members; (b) the provider provides *aged care through one or more *aged care services to fewer than 40 care recipients. (4) Paragraph (2)(a) or (b) does not apply in relation to an approved provider at a particular time if a determination under section 63-1E that the responsibility set out in that paragraph does not apply in relation to the provider is in force at that time. (11) Schedule 8, item 49, page 112 (line 15), omit "subsections (3) and (4)", substitute "subsection (4)". (12) Schedule 8, item 49, page 112 (lines 25 to 29), omit all the words from and including "anyone" to the end of subsection 161(3), substitute "a member of the Pricing Authority". (13) Schedule 8, item 124, page 137 (line 9), omit "subsection 161(3) of the National Health Reform Act 2011", substitute "subsection 161(1) or (2) of the National Health Reform Act 2011 (other than a member of the Pricing Authority (within the meaning of that Act))". (14) Page 145 (after line 5), at the end of the Bill, add: Schedule 9 — Restrictive practices Aged Care Act 1997 1 After subsection 54-10(1) Insert: (1A) The Quality of Care Principles made for the purposes of paragraph 54-1(1)(f) may make provision for, or in relation to, the persons or bodies who may give informed consent to the use of a *restrictive practice in relation to a care recipient if the care recipient lacks capacity to give that consent. 2 Subsection 54-10(3) After "Subsections (1)", insert ", (1A)". 3 At the end of Division 54 Add: 54-11 Immunity from civil or criminal liability in relation to the use of a restrictive practice in certain circumstances (1) This section applies if: (a) an approved provider provides aged care of a kind specified in the Quality of Care Principles made for the purposes of paragraph 54-1(1)(f) to a care recipient; and (b) a *restrictive practice is used in relation to the care recipient; and (c) the care recipient lacked capacity to give informed consent to the use of the restrictive practice. (2) A *protected entity is not subject to any civil or criminal liability for, or in relation to, the use of the *restrictive practice in relation to the care recipient if: (a) informed consent to the use of the restrictive practice was given by a person or body specified in the Quality of Care Principles made for the purposes of this paragraph; and (b) the restrictive practice was used in the circumstances set out in the Quality of Care Principles made for the purposes of paragraph 54-1(1)(f). (3) Each of the following is a protected entity: (a) the approved provider referred to in paragraph (1)(a); (b) an individual who used, or assisted in the use of, the *restrictive practice in relation to the care recipient referred to in that paragraph. 4 Clause 1 of Schedule 1 Insert: protected entity has the meaning given by subsection 54-11(3). Question agreed to. Bill, as amended, agreed to. Third Reading 105 18:04 Mr TIM WILSON IMW Goldstein by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Social Security Legislation Amendment (Remote Engagement Program) Bill 2021 105

Social Security Legislation Amendment (Remote Engagement Program) Bill 2021

Second Reading 105 18:05 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I rise to speak to the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Remote Engagement Program) Bill 2021, 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: (a) the proposed pilot remote engagement program is intended to replace the current remote employment program, the Community Development Program (CDP); (b) the Government are the architects of the current failed CDP and the bill again delays long-overdue changes to this program; (c) concerns this bill could entrench a welfare model, rather than job creation, economic development and self-determination; and (d) this bill does not address fundamental issues in remote Australia such as housing and essential services; and (2) calls on the Government to adopt Labor's policy of a remote employment program with real jobs, proper wages with full conditions, and meaningful community control". The amendment asks the House to do five things: note that the proposed pilot remote engagement program is intended to replace the current remote employment program, the Community Development Program, or CDP; that the government are the architects of the current failed CDP, and the bill again delays long-overdue changes to this program; concerns this bill could entrench a welfare model rather than job creation, economic development and self-determination; and that this bill does not address fundamental issues in remote Australia, such as housing and essential services; and, finally, call on the government to adopt Labor's policy of a remote employment program with real jobs, proper wages with full conditions, and meaningful community control. The government's remote engagement program pilot is yet another missed opportunity to, firstly, put in place a genuine remote employment service and, secondly, address the underlying challenges of living in remote Australia. The challenges of living in remote Australia are many and well known. On average, remote Australians have shorter lives, higher levels of disease and injury and poorer access to health services compared with people living in metropolitan areas. This is caused by multiple factors. In addition to a lack of real jobs, there is a lack of adequate housing and access to essential services. This bill will do nothing to address any of the challenges. Instead, this government has brought forward a bill offering a fig leaf of changes and a two-year pilot program. These changes are bad in themselves, and they won't make things better for remote Australians. The problem that Labor has identified is that the bill just won't make anything better. An Albanese Labor government would never have brought forward this bill, which is a great disappointment. It was just last year that the government signed up to revised targets in the National Agreement on Closing the Gap, including the reduction of overcrowded housing. This bill was a first test for the government, and what we see is that nothing will fundamentally change for CDP participants and remote communities and that there is no new remote employment program on the horizon. Meanwhile, the challenges of living in remote Australia are very real, and they need to be fixed and fixed now. Data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare shows that almost one in five Indigenous Australians are living in chronically overcrowded housing—nationally, 18 per cent of First Nations people, compared to 5 per cent of non-Indigenous Australians. The level of overcrowding increases with remoteness—over 20 per cent of adults in regional areas and over 48 per cent of adults in remote communities. The highest levels of overcrowding in Australia occur in remote Northern Territory. Based on the 2016 census, about 27,600 Aboriginal Territorians live in overcrowded houses, of whom 10,700 are considered homeless. This lack of adequate housing and this overcrowding affect every aspect of community life It increases the levels of domestic violence, suicide, poor mental health, lack of safety, poor hygiene and the spread of diseases. Just recently, Australians witnessed a frightening example of how rapidly disease will spread through an Indigenous community trying to deal with overcrowding when the Indigenous residents of Wilcannia had to contend with COVID-19 and its deadly consequences. We all saw the impact; we all witnessed First Nations residents with a positive COVID test forced to live in makeshift tents in their front yards just to protect their families. And it was not a one-off occurrence. It happened again and again until the government was shamed into acting. The virus spread fast because of the lack of a national vaccine strategy for Indigenous people and because of chronic overcrowding, a problem that is well known at all levels of government. The overcrowding experienced by First Nations people is a national shame, and this government continues to have no long-term national housing strategy for First Nations people. In the May budget this year the government offered hope to end CDP and replace it with a new program targeting jobs and skills development, and it flagged that mutual obligation requirements would be relaxed during the development of this new remote jobs program. But in the end, all that was being offered was a two-year trial of new approaches to undertaking 'work-like' activities. While there is no explanation of what 'work-like' activities actually means, we do know it doesn't mean real jobs. We also know that individuals who volunteered for this trial stay on JobSeeker. So the new remote engagement program under trial is just another work-for-the-dole scheme—CDP by another name. This is such a disappointment. The government has not kept its promise of replacing the CDP program targeting jobs and skills development. It's just a fiddle with the policy and rebranding. The government should adopt Labor's policy for remote employment services. A Labor government will replace CDP with a genuine remote employment program, one that puts in place the best elements of the former Community Development Employment Program, the old CDEP, a program that creates real local jobs with proper wages and conditions and which offers meaningful community control and a pathway to self-determination. I remind the House that the CDP was designed and implemented by this government. It is a broken and discriminatory program that has been operating under various iterations since 2015. Its purpose was to put in place a welfare-dependent employment service program, a remote work-for-the-dole program, but one that was much harsher, with many more compliance requirements than was expected for jobseekers in other regions in Australia. It took just two years: in 2017 a Senate inquiry into the effectiveness and appropriateness of CDP found that the program was an abject failure. Expert witnesses to the inquiry argued that CDP was discriminatory, that it actually acted against job creation and that CDP was acting as a pool of cheap labour. These experts also said CDP was damaging because more than 50 per cent of all penalties imposed on jobseekers across Australia were for people on CDP. These penalties occurred because Centrelink was not able to take into consideration the family, social, cultural and community obligations on members of an Indigenous community. The repeated breaches and imposed penalties resulted in the loss of income payments, causing financial distress and increasing poverty. The difficulties of staying on the CDP have seen an increase in disengagement from the program, and more local crime and family violence. These outcomes are well known, and that is why Labor is saying this bill is another wasted opportunity for the government. Why is the government being so stubborn? Why is it unable to listen to remote Indigenous communities and leaders? What was it about the CDEP that made it so positive for remote Australia? Under the CDEP, jobseekers could do more than just receive their unemployment benefits. They could take on real local jobs created and administered by local First Nations communities, paid at minimum wage rates for hours worked. The program offered a genuine alternative to being on welfare while still contributing to their communities, and there were flow-on benefits for the community—meaningful control and a pathway to self-determination. The scheme operated under a flexible funding model that allowed communities to complete self-identified projects. This government appears to genuinely have a problem with the idea of Indigenous self-determination. Over the years the government has attempted to reform the CDP and make it less onerous. The first attempt was in December 2015, just six months after the program had started. The changes were strongly criticised by Indigenous stakeholders and service providers because of a lack of consultation. In the end, this amending bill lapsed because no-one supported it. In December 2017 the government tried again. This time it issued a discussion paper canvassing three options for reform, including a new wage base similar to the CDP. But when the bill finally came forward in 2018 it had added a target compliance framework—a demerit system—and the subsidised wage scheme was limited to just 6,000 CDP participants. These changes were again sharply rejected by stakeholders because, again, no-one had been consulted, and, again, the bill lapsed. In 2019 the government tried again to get to the bottom of remote-jobseeker concerns and undertook an evaluation of the CDP. In summary, it found that more participants than not thought the CDP had been bad for their communities and that the high penalty rates were discouraging people from participation. So many remote young people were just not receiving income support, because to stay on the CDP was just too hard. Yet here we go again; the government has come back to the parliament with a bill for emerging employment services it has not consulted on. Aboriginal Peak Organisations Northern Territory, APO NT, told a Senate committee on the legislation: 'What the government still fails to understand is that CDP participants are already trained. They have worked and will work if there are jobs available.' And the data shows that nothing is changing for remote Indigenous communities under a work-for-the-dole program. APO NT also told us that over the last decade the employment gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in remote Australia has grown, and that the poverty and social harms that arise from this have increased. Independent analysis has found that the CDP has contributed to this growing gap. Labor has many concerns with this bill and its pilot program, primarily because it is such a missed opportunity. While the bill contains very little detail on how it will be designed and implemented, it does establish the remote engagement participation payment, a supplementary payment to income support. The payment of up to $190 a fortnight for 104 weeks will be offered for undertaking work-like activities in community identified placements, but it is only for 200 participants in the five pilot sites. That's about 40 people for each site. This is not reform. This is delay. Because the minister will be the decision-maker on all matters relating to the pilot program, only he knows what the new compliance regime will be. But what we do know about the pilot is that the participants will not be offered the normal protections of other workers, like wages, leave entitlements and superannuation. They will not be offered a traineeship or apprenticeship and have no guarantee of a real job at the end of two years. We cannot determine whether the pilot program will be discriminatory or compatible with human rights. The minister has told the parliament that the lack of operational detail is because the government need to be flexible in developing the new program and we should take them on trust, but the government have broken many of their promises to First Nations people. The most recent was their failure to deliver a voice to the parliament, a referendum on constitutional recognition in this term of government and a national vaccine strategy for First Nations people. This government cannot be trusted to improve the lives of First Nations participants on CDP. Labor would never have brought forward this bill. First Nations people do not need another quick fix to a welfare program and a rehash of the same old failed policies. They need the government to address the underlying challenge affecting lives and holding people back. A Labor government will not make the same mistakes. We will not only end CDP; we will listen to First Nations people and put in place the program they want, one that generates economic growth and creates job opportunities, because there is no substitute for paid employment. Our program will be implemented by our Aboriginal community controlled service providers and include large-scale Indigenous employers in remote Australia. Their expertise will be central to the design of any new employment program. In conclusion, the government has yet again missed an opportunity and offered the parliament minor tweaks to a major problem. We don't need a pilot. First Nations people need a new employment program implemented across the whole country. What is the use of a trial in only five locations when a good employment program should be flexible enough to be tailored to the needs of every community from the beginning? The parliament has two options: to support the sliver of change being offered or to reject the bill outright. Because the situation in remote Indigenous communities has become so dire, Labor will not stand in the way of the passage of this bill. The participation payment will provide a benefit for some CDP participants and their communities. For the other 29,500-plus active CDP jobseekers who will not receive the payment or participate in the pilot, nothing will change. They must remain on CDP until sometime in the future. Labor does not consider this to be a good outcome, and so I ask the minister: go back and listen to First Nations people again and redesign your program to one that delivers for all on CDP, a program that will actually get people into work, gives on country young people opportunities and truly helps to end poverty in remote communities. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 198084 Is the amendment seconded? Mr Watts 193430 I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 198084 The original question was that this bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Barton has moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted with a view to substituting other words. If it suits the House, I'll state the question in the form that the amendment be disagreed to. 18:24 Mr LAMING E0H Bowman [by video link] This is an important change to social security law in remote Indigenous Australia. There is a long history of battling to make sure that the opportunities we enjoy in the cities and regions are also available in Central and remote Australia. And it's a timely reminder that, right now, Indigenous Australia has been exploring, as recently as last week at the Aboriginal Economic Development Forum in Alice Springs, potential opportunities to unlock the Aboriginal estate; and to recall that, by 2030, perhaps half of Australia's landmass will be under Indigenous control, and we need to make sure that Indigenous Australians can be maximising their opportunities for cultural, economic and social self-determination. There's plenty of that kind of talk in the parliament, but, in reality, how many of us have actually lived in a remote community to understand how it works? Having listened to the member for Barton give a speech clearly written by someone else and basically read out word for word, it's of enormous frustration that there's certainly no reform zeal from the party that have consistently made out that they lead the way in social policy and in Indigenous policy reform. Quite clearly, the federal opposition are all about moving the lips just sufficiently to not offend anyone and to walk both sides of the street, making out that they're defending the needs of those in remote Australia but also doing the right thing by those in the city and being seen to be appeasing the bleeding hearts that insist on these terrible generalisations that come out of the left wing—that every young Indigenous person wants to be either a ranger or a painter, and it's simply not the case. Aboriginal Australia have moved on from the Australian Labor Party, and they're about making the most of opportunities that are increasingly coming to remote Australia. But, before we can get there, we do need a fit-for-purpose social services system and we don't have that at present. That's despite the efforts of two sides of government. As an employee of ATSIS in 2004 and, arguably, one of their last employees—I was paid out long after the organisation ceased to exist—as a consultant I saw firsthand exactly what was going on in education, employment and housing entities, and I was, among other things, reviewing how CDEP worked. Listening to a Labor Party politician, let alone a shadow minister, talking about CDEP as if it was creating real local jobs and a genuine alternative to welfare—that is an urban-based Indigenous Australian who clearly has never lived in a remote community to understand how it is out there. You quite simply cannot expect these kinds of outcomes that she describes, a pathway to self-determination, from programs like this alone. What's needed is an honest conversation. We've got 16 Close the Gap targets, so many that no-one can remember them all, and virtually no-one in this country wakes up and makes it a mission to close the gap. There are simply too many of them. It's fine to have a blizzard of Close the Gap targets, but it starts off with the somewhat paternalistic notion that they need to catch up to us. I firmly believe that Indigenous Australia can be better than us—that the black brand can be something that the world seeks. This is not about closing a gap. This is about, in many cases, Indigenous Australians moving ahead of the way we see the world, if they haven't already, and exploiting and maximising the opportunities available to them. But what have they got to do for that to happen? We need some honest conversation about the importance of senior men and women in an Indigenous society that simply doesn't exist in mainstream. We've set up a welfare system that weakens, erodes and undermines the senior men and women who should be having more of a say on the ground. This is not about regional and state voices to parliament. This is about local voices, full stop. Until you're listening to local voices, not undermining them with these individualised welfare models that work very well everywhere else but don't work in remote Australia—and then we use the overlay of community funding arrangements to cause internecine disputes and squabbles over funding, and we have supracommunity groups, such as, and dare I say it, very good people on land councils. But, as long as land councils are doing the stuff that families need to be looking after for themselves, there will still be an agentive challenge. We need to be honest that the work of land councils, some of it good, some of it maybe not, needs to come back to family groups. There's nowhere else in the world where we basically expropriate our own financial services and our financial matters off to another body when we do not actually know what we own in the body. It's one thing to use technology like blockchain to identify exactly who the trusted authorities are and exactly who owns what, but we don't have that at all. We're seeing money funnelling across into these other agencies and, rightly, questions on the ground about whether this is working in the interests of individual family groups. If there is one message I would leave today as we try again for a new set of pilot assessments for a better way of community economic development in remote Australia, be it small, be it modest—and it needs to start small and then be replicated when successful—it would be to identify the senior men and women in kinship and clan groups and work with them for a solution just for their family group. If there are three, four or five of them—however many there are in a community—that's so many conversations we will have to ensure no-one is left out. We need a menu of training, employment and education options for every working-age adult and every teenager on their way to becoming a working-age adult, to give them a solution. And we need more opportunities than there is demand for them, remembering that, like everyone, people will fail, change their minds and try something new. That has to be accounted for. You may be listening in today to this debate and wondering which side of this green chamber is actually looking out for the family connection to land, this absolutely understood relationship between family and their land and sea. There has to be a recognition that the senior people in these families need to have more say but also carry far more responsibility for the conduct of their family members. But the last thing we want to be doing, as I've said before, is expropriating out these kinds of decisions to community councils or non-elected bodies or government officials or land councils, for goodness sake. These decisions need to be with the families themselves, or we are absolutely certain to be beset by more failure. Australians living in remote Australia know it's a complex environment. They don't need us talking about it like we're giving a Close the Gap speech once a year, particularly from an opposition spokesperson for the Labor Party. This speech would have broken thousands of hearts around the country, simply because of the lack of vision, the lack of understanding about how it is out in remote Australia. We understand, in mainstream Australia, having lived in business conditions for five centuries, that two-thirds of businesses don't employ anyone. We know that 95 per cent of them fail in the first two years. We know that only one per cent of businesses employ more than four people. Just switching on the business switch alone doesn't solve any problems; it's a series of options that come together to provide opportunities. If you're a young Indigenous person at high school right now in remote Australia—and you could be a fair way from home—I challenge you to talk to your community leaders, like the one you just heard speaking before me, and say: 'What is your plan for my community? Where are the jobs earmarked for me on my country?' I understand you don't all want to be rangers and dot painters—and I don't dismiss Aboriginal art in any condescending manner; I'm saying that young Aboriginal Australians don't all want to be painters because they tell me that. They want the full range of economic opportunities. To deliver those opportunities to remote Australia takes ingenuity, planning and making unique arrangements, but I want to say one very clear thing: the cost of a better running system is a fraction of the status quo with the enormous social, housing, incarceration, health and education costs that we currently bear. Noel Pearson has said that so clearly. There is only a way out of this causal web of dysfunction if people like the member for Barton can put their speaking notes down and actually identify a community where the conversation has to be led, guided, by senior Aboriginal men and women on how everyone has something to do. As a government, you can't step into the lives of every family. I know as a doctor I can't kick a door down to go in and deliver public health, but to have a mature conversation begins with both major parties recognising the failures of the past. I've said already that 27 years ago I had my first experience living in a semidesert community in the Northern Territory, on and off for 15 months. Twenty-seven years prior to that, just up the road, at Daguragu and Wave Hill, the land was handed back in that symbolic moment with the then Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. You'd have to say, Deputy Speaker, there have been a few moments since when we all hoped for change. We all hoped that then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's apology was going to make a difference. I've tagged it enough times in things I've said: more practical, less symbolism. I'll continue to stand for that in public life and ultimately will be proven correct. No-one's saying symbolism isn't important, but too many of us have used it as cover to get away with not changing anything on the ground. It's hard. There are special interests and divided responsibilities. Money flows in, primarily from these social service and welfare payments, and, in a single pass, that non-Indigenous dollar shoots back out of the community, usually through the local store, through buying goods that aren't manufactured in the community and not cultivating or encouraging any services for Indigenous people in that community are delivered by that community themselves. What we've created is a unique economy in remote Australia where the residents make no goods that their fellow residents want to use, they deliver no services privately that anyone is prepared to pay for, and we're left with publicly funded welfare and imported cheap goods that are dumped into the store as a way of siphoning welfare back out of these communities as fast as possible. In the absence of any value adding, in the absence of any vertical integration, in the absence of any multiplier effect, this is the most corrosive economic model we could have imposed on our First Australians. We have managed to do it and we give lip service to how passionate we are about changing it. But we are yet to have, even in one community—save perhaps the Cape York work and the Cape York Institute—one conversation about how we might change that. We are yet to have one conversation that looks forward five years, identifies the children in high school or even finishing primary school, and says: 'We are a town council, we are a land council. My job today is to provision for those young people five years from now. Where will they work, study, train? How will they orbit out of their community when they need to? How do we account for a culturally safe employment arrangement where, should they need to return to their communities, they can?' If I had my way, every Indigenous Australian leaving a remote community would have in their hand a flight ticket back to their community to use at any time social requirements mean they need to return urgently. We have to be flexible around the importance of family in Indigenous Australia. It is something that we in the mainstream are yet to grasp. If you talk to mining companies, they'll say, 'We put 20 on but we're lucky to get three to show up.' Well, start having the conversations about having an Indigenous-friendly system that allows these workers to be confident to go to work and stay at work. We have way too many yellow hi-vis vests, way too many payments that aren't being attached to employment. (Quorum formed) This is probably a good time to wind up as well. I will just say that this trial, which effectively provides a minimum wage type employment— (Time expired) 18:41 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon [by video link] You can't get much more offensive than the member for Bowman. His behaviour is really something else, and he keeps outdoing himself. I would like to thank the shadow minister, the member for Barton, for her contribution and for setting out in an excellent way our concerns with the CDP. The member for Bowman and the government can be assured that, on taking federal government, we will put in place a program that is much more effective than what is currently being done or even proposed. I probably just need to just say one other thing. The member for Bowman asked the question, 'Where are the jobs on communities?' He says, 'Where are the jobs in those remote communities?' Someone may want to remind him that he's part of a government that has been governing Australia and responsible for Indigenous affairs and the issues pertaining to this bill, the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Remote Engagement Program) Bill 2021, for eight years. So maybe he should ask his own colleagues where they are and be a bit more constructive if he thinks he has any good ideas. Many people have been to remote Indigenous communities. Some are constructive; some grandstand. I would expect more of a member of parliament, but that's obvious. The seriously flawed CDP scheme has had a massively negative effect on remote Aboriginal communities, particularly here in the Northern Territory. It has increased poverty and social harm while purporting to be designed to do the opposite: to alleviate poverty. The CDP has stunted remote job creation because it essentially created a pool of thousands of people who have had to work simply to get Centrelink unemployment benefits rather than focus on building local communities and local economies. So much of the work that they did was similar to that already being done by local governments or by NGOs, and in many cases it wasn't useful work; it was just a box-ticking, time-killing sort of scheme. What it was really doing was killing the time of First Nations Australians. It didn't enrich the communities, it wasn't sustainable and, unlike the CDEP program that it replaced, it did not do those things. But I will get to the CDEP in a little while. We know that over the last decade, the employment gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians in remote Australia has grown and that the CDP has helped it to grow. The coalition government has known for a long time about the CDP's major failures; after all, it has been five years since the Senate inquiry into the effectiveness and appropriateness of the CDP. Again, you have to ask those opposite speaking on this bill about what they've been saying for the last five years when we all knew how ineffective and inappropriate this program was. Those opposite, members of the government, only ended the program this year. So now to the new Regional Engagement Program, the REP. I honestly don't think it will do much to improve things, so the question is: why does the coalition not care about creating real jobs in remote First Nations communities? The Regional Engagement Program is just another disappointing work-for-the-dole scheme. It repeats one of the major problems of the CDP, which is requiring people to work without proper pay and workplace protections. Those opposite just refuse to admit what we already know, that so many people on the current CDP are already trained and can work in real jobs if they're available. We're wasting their exceptional skills and talents to produce local economic development—something the coalition says they're experts in: developing economies. After eight years, there's nothing much to be seen. The member for Bowman even confirmed that in his contribution earlier. The REP has a supplementary payment which will benefit a small number of remote Indigenous jobseekers, only about 200 people. However, about 40,000 of the remaining CDP participants in remote communities will continue to struggle in poverty, with no real change until at least 2024—which is three years from now! So this failure of a government, after not creating local economies in remote Australia—not caring to do that for eight years—and having known how inappropriate their program is for five years, has put in place this legislation, which will be another three years of failure if there's not another change of government at the next federal election. There will be more handwringing, if that were to be the case, about closing the gap targets missed. So we really need that change of federal government at this upcoming election. We need a federal Labor government that understands these issues intimately, that cares for these communities, and that will work with the Aboriginal people and communities to develop their communities and local economies so that the First Nations people living and working there are able to move out of poverty with that support, working in conjunction with all levels of government and the non-government sector. But we must remember that we're talking about a federal government, the coalition, that doesn't support the Uluru Statement from the Heart. They say they are listening. They say Aboriginal people should be listened to and have things done with them, not to them. The reality is very different. The acting NT children's Commissioner, Sally Sievers, and the director of Save the Children for the NT and WA, Noelene Swanson, recently said that every third child in the NT is living in poverty. That's on the current federal government's watch. After eight years of neglect and five years of knowing that CDP wasn't effective or appropriate, they are now putting in place a name change that will essentially lead to three more years of failure if they are not replaced. What federal Labor wants and will deliver in government is a program that supports First Nations people in ongoing, sustainable work which will cut dependency on welfare and strengthen First Nations communities and businesses. As the shadow minister, the member for Barton, said, it has to have Aboriginal community controlled service providers in remote regions to make it a reality, to make it happen. We've known for decades that this is the best way to achieve long-lasting success in this area. It needs to include Indigenous employers who hire people on a large scale throughout remote Australia. We need to use their experience, their expertise, the hard work they have done and what they've developed in this space. Recently, the NT government launched its new 10-year education engagement strategy. We know that too many children aren't engaged in school and with their education, for lots of complex reasons. The NT government recognises that a holistic approach supporting kids in remote communities is needed. That includes investing in better housing and health care and in early education. It also recognises that young First Nations people need to be taught within the framework of their own culture and their own language. A good way to do this, and where the new REP could do something useful, is to tap into the skills of our remote communities and families as teachers for our remote kids. We could also do more on the ranger programs. Last week I met with the Larrakia Rangers in my electorate of Solomon, in Darwin. In a bipartisan way, I commend the government for the funding they've recently given to the Larrakia Rangers and the Northern Land Council through the Ranger Capability Building Grants Program. We need to see a lot more Indigenous business development. We need to see genuine commitment to self-determination and community based governance and support which will see economic growth in our remote communities. I want to acknowledge a couple of Indigenous businesses that are doing exceptional things in my electorate. I acknowledge House of Darwin and Shaun Edwards. This is a social enterprise. It is a for-profit clothing company that designs iconic shirts, hats and swimwear and reinvests its profits into social programs in remote NT communities. I know it's doing absolutely great work. There is another example which has come up to us from down south. I want to mention it because I think it is the future, with social enterprises and First Nations people working with each other. With the support of government, they could do so much more. Ngarrimili, founded by Cormach Evans, is an Aboriginal-led non-profit providing support and entrepreneurial opportunities to First Nations businesses and creatives around Australia. They want to create enduring and sustainable economic development. I've met with them, and I'm going to assist them to connect with local people who they can help. There is a movement here, because First Nations people have seen after eight long years that they can't wait for the government; they have to make things happen themselves. There have been a lot of broken promises from the government, and obviously there is a lot of mistrust. Mistrust of the federal government is undermining confidence in the ability of government to help with these issues. It might suit the current federal government, but a federal Labor government will be active. We will consult, as we have done for so many years, because First Nations people, businesses and organisations know what's needed to get the job done. We have to rebuild that trust, and we will. I want to see the government show how it intends to work to meet the Closing the Gap employment targets without a genuine remote job creation program. That is the challenge I put to the speakers coming up on the government side to speak on this bill. They have changed the name of the CDP, something that they've known for at least five years was not fit for purpose and was not achieving the outcome. How will the name change really create those economies in local communities? We know what we're going to do in government—and in the Northern Territory it's really needed. In a place, as I said, where one in three children are living in poverty after eight years of either doing very little or not doing things with First Nations people and communities and not listening to their Statement from the Heart, it is well past time that federal Labor's plan for remote jobs is allowed to happen, and I hope it does. 18:56 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey I must say that I am pretty disappointed in the very mean-spirited, negative and overtly political way that the two speakers from the opposition thus far have approached this debate on the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Remote Engagement Program) Bill 2001. I come to this place as someone who represents a large part of remote Australia, and I work very hard for all of my constituents, including the eight per cent or so who are Indigenous. I believe that the overwhelming majority of members of this place believe in trying to provide a better future, and I think that we should be less critical than the way that those speakers have gone about it. Most of the information that Australians have—and they are of the view that things should be better too—comes from television programs et cetera, which will have a slant on it that that particular program will want to give. You need to approach all of these information sources with caution. But those of us who have been privileged to go into these communities as part of our work will realise that these issues are many layered and these are difficult problems. But the problems, the challenges and the opportunities of the remote Indigenous population are poorly understood by most Australians, I would have to say. The underlying belief that Indigenous communities will prosper if only we offer enough resource to maintain them in a traditional lifestyle is, I think, a premise that needs to be questioned by all of us. We supply housing, health services, schools and a pretty good standard in all those things. We could do with more housing—I certainly admit that—but the health services, the schools and the shops that are underwritten by the Commonwealth in most cases are of good quality, and we provide an income so they can buy food and shelter. Some might say that this equals an ideal outcome—that we are providing sustenance for these people to live on their traditional lands and live a 'traditional' lifestyle. But they are living far from a traditional lifestyle. Having provided all these things, we have, in many cases, actually taken the purpose from their life and their culture—their reason for existence. In a traditional lifestyle they were largely preoccupied with feeding and clothing and finding shelter for their families. Of course, that is not the case anymore. In many cases you can see the breakdown of what were their cultures and disciplines within. No longer do the younger generation need to listen to the older generation on how to live their life and how to apply themselves. The things that they used to do are really done for traditional purposes now to try to keep hold of those things that were the foundations of their societies, rather than for need. One of the problems we have with many of these remote communities—certainly the ones that sit within South Australia, the most prominent of them being the APY Lands—is that they exist in a place where there is a very small natural economy, if you like. The APY Lands were given freehold to the Anangu, Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara tribes in 1981 by the Tonkin Liberal government in South Australia. Historically, after European settlement, these were pastoral properties. At their peak they probably employed maybe 100 stockmen across that area, which is roughly 10 per cent of SA, and many of those would have been Aboriginal stockmen. But things change, and agriculture has changed mightily. If they were to run efficiently now as cattle properties, as they were then, they would probably employ 10 people, maybe 15 at the outside. They have helicopters to muster, electronic mustering systems on waterholes and electric fencing—all the things we can do now that we couldn't do 100 years ago. But over 3,000 people live on the APY Lands and there are 15 jobs there if things go well. The next question is: what is the next job? Obviously there are jobs providing services in health and education but, largely, this population is very poorly equipped to deliver those. They don't have the education levels to do so and so those jobs go to outsiders—to whitefellas in most cases. So this has become a very difficult issue. I don't see any easy way out of it. My hope is that in the longer term the education system is sound enough that a generation will take the position where, while the APY Lands might be their cultural home and where they return for cultural practices, they will go out and, as Noel Pearson would say, 'live in two worlds'. They would go and compete, get educated, and join the workforce in the outside world, because I don't see where that natural economy lies in those lands. It would be about 10 years ago, I was the member for Grey, that I was wandering around Ceduna one Saturday afternoon. I called into what I would call the office of Aboriginal affairs but these departments change their minds often enough that I can't be absolutely certain that that's what it was called at the time. There was a woman there; she would have been about 35, I suppose—and, if she's listening, I don't remember your name and I'm sorry if I got your age wrong!—and I asked what she was doing. She said: 'I'm just tidying up a few ends here. I just came in today.' I had a bit of a chat with her, and I asked, 'Where do you come from?' She said, 'I come from Canberra.' I said: 'Oh, really! What are you doing out here?' She said: 'Well, I was working in the department in Canberra. I was writing policy and I thought it might be a good idea if I came out here and had a look at what it was like on the ground. I said: 'That's an excellent notion, good on you. What do you think now?' She looked at me and she said: 'I don't know what I think anymore. Everything I thought is upside down out here. All the things I thought would work in Canberra don't work when you get on the ground out here.' That's one of the issues we're dealing with. She wasn't too sure what she was going to do after her stint in Ceduna, but I do think there would be great value in many more public servants who work in Aboriginal affairs doing exactly the same as she did. This purposeless existence has largely exacerbated the abuse of drugs and alcohol, domestic violence—let me tell you, that's terrible—crime, imprisonment and breakdown of family. Just as a point of reference for this, I think we all in this place are concerned about the percentage of Indigenous people in custody. The latest figure I have is that 70 per cent of those in custody are there as a penalty for acts of violence, mostly against women. For those who that think these people shouldn't go to jail, I'll ask: Who protects those that they've been abusing? Who incurred the wrath of the courts in the first place that placed them in the jail? I'm not saying any outcome is good and that I've got an easy answer, but I think we need to all understand what the real drivers of these issues are. So it is absolutely a vicious cycle, and that is where the value of a job comes in. We all know in this place, or most of us know, that if you've got a job—the phrase we've used often is—it's the best form of welfare. But it gives so much more than an income; it gives value in a person's life, it gives a reason to get out of bed in the morning, it gives structure to a person's life. It's fair to say that governments of both persuasions have recognised the value of a job and there have been numerous programs. I heard the member for Barton waxing lyrical about the CDP program, which Labor put into place. I think looking through rose coloured glasses in hindsight is not necessarily a good thing to do. The CDP program was abandoned because there was no viable pathway to permanent work. The problem was people got on CDP and stayed there permanently. The government attempted to put a sharper focus on climbing out of that and actually getting into a regular workforce. Now we are to have another attempt at somehow trying to get the formula right, but I don't say of any side of politics that they've tried to get the formula wrong; I think they've tried to get it right and it's not easy. These instances and things that I've referred to already demonstrate how difficult this is. It shouldn't be controversial that we're having a genuine attempt to try and make things better for the lives of those who live in remote communities. The Member for Bruce is in the chamber, I see. I do have to mention that this morning he brought a motion into the chamber which certainly foreshadowed a future Labor government's intention to get rid of the cashless debit card. I've spoken to some Aboriginal people in the cashless debit card area, and I said to them, 'You know, the Labor Party now seems committed to get rid of the cashless debit card,' and one of the gentlemen virtually spat out, 'What would you expect!' I can tell you that there are a large number of Indigenous people in the community who do not want to lose the cashless debit card. But that is Labor's prerogative, and I believe they would be putting that forward in good faith, and I make that point. What they did not put forward in good faith was scurrilous. They were trying to establish the lie that it was the coalition government's intent to apply the cashless debit card to aged pensioners. We never have and we never will. To bring that up is a complete echo of the 'Mediscare' campaign that the Labour Party ran in 2016, when, on the eve of the election they were robocalling pensioners and telling them the coalition was going to get rid of Medicare. What a disgraceful act, and that bill this morning was a repeat of that performance It's a complete lie and must be labelled as such. To move on, what we're now doing, with the establishment of the regional engagement program, is searching for more community involvement and a bigger focus on skills development to provide a pathway off of these welfare systems into work. We're doing it now with an enticement—a bonus, if you like. A word of warning though: I've been talking to some Indigenous communities lately, and they're reporting that they're getting more out-of-towners, people from the remote lands coming into places like Cooper Pedy, Port Augusta and Ceduna and not going home. When I asked the reason for this, it was given to me quite plainly: because you've made the CDP voluntary rather than compulsory, so now these people don't have to go home to actually tick the box to make sure they can get their payment. So they're leaving houses and families behind and going into the bigger urban centres where they can access alcohol, and that is causing great concern for my communities at the moment. That is a result of court action that occurred in Western Australia. This bill establishes the new supplementary payment—the remote engagement program payment, if you like—to participate in a work type role in a volunteer capacity with a government service or a community organisation. The plan is to build skills and define a pathway to a job. Something I think has been a very successful government program is the government purchase ratios, under which government departments are directed to make sure they are buying roughly three per cent of their inputs from Indigenous controlled, owned or operated organisations. I understand that we are getting pretty close to those numbers. I have seen quite a number of Indigenous corporations and businesses get started on the back of that. That is a really good indication of where we want to go. With this program we are going to train up workers to get into those programs, I hope. It is a good tick. It's one small brick in the building of a large wall. This program is to be a pilot program, and we are consulting with the communities before, during and after the pilot to make sure we get the right kind of mixture for every community. At the end of the day, a job is the best form of welfare. 19:11 Mr ROB MITCHELL M3E McEwen I rise tonight to talk about something that is so important, the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Remote Engagement Program) Bill 2021. I take issue with what the member for Grey just told us. It was absolutely misleading to say that there were no privatisation plans by this government. In fact, in February 2016, John Cahill was a bureaucrat in charge of a Medicare task force of the then Turnbull government to privatise parts of Medicare. We already have age pensioners on the Indue card, another card that's been created to line the pockets of Liberal mates. It is up to them to be honest and upfront with the Australian people when they come in here. I know that would be a novel exercise for them, but it really needs to be done. We should put on the record that what we heard was in fact untrue, incorrect and, I think, deliberately misleading to people listening to say that the government was never going down the track to privatise parts of Medicare. It's factually wrong. That 9 February 2016 quote came from Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. They were their own government's leader's words. Throughout the eight years of their government, the Liberal-National Party coalition have failed again and again to deliver support for those living in remote communities. The barriers to employment facing those who live in such communities, particularly our First Nations people, are significant. It's disappointing that the government has decided to bring forward a bill that is so woefully inadequate in addressing the issues faced by Australians living in remote communities. The bill puts forward a plan to phase out the existing Community Development Program, providing a trial for the new remote engagement program, which will increase payments received by those who are part of the program. Labor supports that part of the bill, because the supplementary payment which will be received by the trial participants provides a necessary financial benefit to the small number of remote Indigenous jobseekers who will be included in the trial, but we must make it clear that the damage that has been done to remote communities over the eight long years of this tired Liberal-National government will not be undone by this bill. The government's CDP, instituted in 2015, drew intense criticism from us and from stakeholders who were impacted by it. Despite the Senate Finance and Public Administration References Committee holding an inquiry in 2016 into the effectiveness and appropriateness of the program, it has taken until 2021 for the government to abolish this program—but it won't be fully phased out until July 2024. That is a nine-year-long offensive, ineffective and inappropriate program that has done nothing to create jobs or support individuals in remote areas and, instead, has served only to harm and disenfranchise vulnerable communities. Labor hoped that, after such a colossal failure, the Morrison government would aim to institute a program that actually served to benefit Australians in remote areas, that created jobs for First Nations people and that was formed in close consultation with our Indigenous communities. Instead, this bill fails to rectify one of the key flaws of the Community Development Program—the requirement that people undertake work without proper pay and workplace protections. This policy approach reflects the government's stubborn refusal to create social security policy based on what is widely already known—that many people on the current Community Development Program who will be on the new remote engagement program are already trained and will work if real jobs become available. It has become offensive for the Morrison government to continue to suggest that Australians living in remote communities are either unwilling or too untrained to find adequate work when the reality is that this bill fails to address one thing—that is, jobs are simply not available in communities. The new program should do everything possible to support First Nations people into long-lasting jobs, reducing welfare dependency and strengthening Indigenous business and communities. It must be implemented via Aboriginal community controlled service providers in remote regions and include large-scale Indigenous employers in remote Australia. Their expertise should be central to any new program design. The government's program fails in these areas. Once again, the government has failed to address the existing challenge of on-country job creation for young people leaving education. The new program will further entrench the status quo of the Community Development Program, paying individuals to participate in dehumanising work-for-the-dole activities. Despite failing to fix the real issues facing remote communities with regard to accessing secure employment and meaningful work, evidence given to the Senate inquiry showed that the remote engagement program also risked undermining the existing on-country jobs, such as Indigenous rangers, because of the potential for cheaper labour under this program. The Scrutiny of Bills committee has further raised concerns about the proposed legislative framework, in particular the lack of clarity on the eligibility requirements for participants and the compliance regime for payment, noting that setting them out in legislative instruments is giving the minister very, very broad discretionary powers. Even worse, the Morrison government's, some may say, deliberate lack of clarity on the administrative arrangements for delivering the program has made it impossible for the Australian Human Rights Commission to provide clear advice on the discriminatory status of this program. The bill fails to address the key flaws of the Community Development Program and it fails to provide any clear pathway to employment for those living in remote communities. We call on the Morrison government to demonstrate a genuine commitment to the goals of self-determination and community based governance, and support the economic growth of rural and remote communities. The government has deliberately broken its promise on the Uluru Statement from the Heart, and First Nations people have a right to be concerned about the Morrison government's commitment to addressing the issues which face so many remote communities. It has started the promised co-design process by designing the participation payments for the pilots without consultation with First Nations people. The government must act to rebuild trust and meet its commitment under priority No. 1 of the National Agreement on Closing the Gap, and deliver co-designed employment services for remote regions. This government's ongoing apathy towards First Nations people in remote communities is a cornerstone of its time in leadership. The failure on these communities stretches far and wide. We have seen the government's failure on remote communities and its inability to ensure adequate access to basic medical services, such as a simple visit to a GP. The government's failures on remote and Indigenous communities throughout the course of the pandemic have been stark as well. Vaccination rates in these communities lag far behind those of many parts of the rest of the country, placing these communities at immense risk as our country begins to open up. The Morrison government's lack of motivation to address the issues facing Indigenous and remote communities is not just a problem, I fear; it's a national disgrace. The government has proposed a bill which fails to reform key issues of existing legislation in this area and provides no real plan to accurately create jobs and enable self-determination in disadvantaged and oppressed communities. Let me make it clear: this bill is far from perfect. In fact, it's not really adequate. However, in the short term the payments offer individuals a financial benefit totalling at least $5,200 over two years. That will have small flow-on for families and communities. Given the significant poverty in remote Australia, largely because of the lack of economic activity and the impact of the community development program, this bill should not be rejected in this place. Allow passage of this bill, and Labor will do that. It should not be constructed as approval. Australians living in remote areas deserve far more than what the Morrison government is offering in this bill, particularly Indigenous Australians, who face many barriers with access to employment, education, healthcare services and so many other aspects of life that we take for granted. These disadvantages are reflected in the quality of life and the life expectancy of people living in these communities. Labor has a real plan to address these issues, to create jobs, to improve social services, to provide social security in ways that respect the lived experience of those we seek to help. The Morrison government talks a big game when it comes to closing the gap and supporting Indigenous Australians, particularly those in remote communities. But this attempt at social service reform is another more than embarrassing attempt for the government to launder their image. Real and immediate action is needed in order to support First Nations people. We need the expansion of job programs, like the Indigenous Rangers Program that have been proven to work. We need to abolish programs that have demonstrated harm to communities, not just rename them. Labor has committed to ending the Community Development Program and replacing it with real jobs creation and an economic program for remote Australia, not just the same flawed program with a new marketing label put on by the Morrison government, which is what they are proposing. Working with First Nations people and consulting with relevant stakeholders are crucial to creating social security programs that truly address the issues that those living in remote communities face, and it removes the very real barriers to accessing employment in these areas. First Nations people and those living in remote communities deserve better than this Morrison government. They deserve better than an old, failed program repackaged with a new name, which is what this bill is. I accept that we have to support it, because any financial gain to those living in remote communities will provide much-needed benefit to those individuals, to their families and to the communities. But we cannot for a moment pretend that this bill is good enough. The trial that this bill proposes will begin with 200 individuals. For those on the other side, that leaves 40,000 Australians currently participating in the Community Development Program to continue to struggle in poverty, forced to work without adequate wages, all for the benefit of actual employment, with no prospect for change under this government until at least 2024. What Australia needs is a real plan for jobs in remote communities, a plan to support individuals with dignity and respect through the process of finding meaningful work. The Morrison government's new plan is really just their old plan, a plan that failed. We need a new plan. Labor has one. We know that only an Albanese-Labor-led government will deliver it. Anthony Albanese and Labor are on the side of our Indigenous Australians. That is not lip service; it is something we stand for wholly and solely. The chance at the next election to replace this tired old government that is full of marketing slogans, rorts and rip-offs has never been more important for our nation's history. As I said, Labor are not going to oppose this bill because there is a tiny bit of benefit to a very small number of people. But it does not go far enough, it does not deliver enough and it still does nothing to address the disadvantage that people in remote communities face. It is not good enough. It is a classic example of a government that actually does not care, that is focused more on its next headline than on delivering brings meaningful change. We know that for Australians right across this nation, when you give them decent employment and job opportunities you build up their self-esteem, you build up their dignity and you help them get out of poverty. Just once it would be great if the government thought about other people rather than itself. 19:24 Mr CONNELLY 282984 Stirling It's a great pleasure to rise and provide some commentary today about the Social Security Legislation Amendment (Remote Engagement Program) Bill 2021. Some may query why a metropolitan member of parliament is rising to speak on a bill that relates to remote engagement. I've had the great opportunity of living and working in some of our regions around Australia, as has my wife. When we were both quite young Army officers and before we had kids, we were posted up in Darwin, and part of my wife's role as the member of the intelligence company up there was to travel throughout the regions right across the Top End and build and maintain those networks for the purposes of information sharing. It was quite a wonderful role and one that she certainly cherished, and I was able to get out into some of those regions myself whilst we were in the Top End. One of the things that became quite obvious during that engagement was that the opportunities to access employment are clearly lacking in the remote areas of Australia, and that's where the bill before us today is absolutely focused. Employment bills give all of us a sense of dignity and purpose, a way to give back to society and to generate rewards for ourselves and our families. Principally, the benefits here I would categorised as dignity and self-worth. Dignity is obtained because we're drawing a wage that allows us to live in a manner which is, for the large part, free of interference from others. Of course we have a responsibility to pay taxes and for those taxes to be responsibly managed by the government of the day. Self-worth is achieved as we participate in society and we produce a good or a service that is of value to others. Providing that good or service and seeing how that benefits society have an intrinsic reward for the person generating that good or service. The reverse is also absolutely accurate: when we are unemployed or when we are underemployed, it's much harder to maintain dignity and self-respect. Whilst we may intrinsically believe that this is the case, it's important to note that this is absolutely backed up by research. In 2011 Australian and New Zealand Consensus Statement on the Health Benefits of Work was published by the Australasian Faculty of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. The signatories here reached a consensus on the following points: that work is generally good for health and wellbeing; that long-term work absence, work disability and unemployment have a negative impact on health and wellbeing; that work is an effective means of reducing poverty—that seems fairly self-explanatory, since one is earning a wage when one is working; and that work is also effective at reducing social exclusion, including that faced by Indigenous populations and other currently disadvantaged groups. With appropriate support, many of those who have the potential to work but are not currently working because of economic and social inequalities, illness or acquired congenital disability can access the benefits of work. The signatories also agreed that individuals seeking to enter the workforce for the first time, seeking re-employment or attempting to return to work after a period of, say, injury or illness face a complex situation in which there are a great many variables and that good outcomes are more likely when individuals themselves understand that there are health benefits relating to work and are empowered to take responsibility for their own situation. Those are the comments that stemmed from the Australasian Faculty of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. What it all points to is a very clear indication that there are inherent benefits of being in employment. Over many decades, governments have tried different approaches to delivering employment services in remote Australia. I've been tracking the debate and have heard a number of my colleagues on both sides here acknowledge that these programs are challenging and complex and difficult. Indeed, we've learned that what works in our cities may not work in our regions and remote areas. Australians living in those remote communities face some complex employment challenges, and these are very different to the employment challenges faced in urban areas. Remote areas cover 75 per cent of the Australian landmass, and there are just fewer jobs available in remote areas. In fact, less than two per cent of actively trading businesses are located in these remote areas. Whilst this does not exclusively impact Indigenous Australians, it does disproportionately affect that cohort. Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 117 ADJOURNMENT National Disability Insurance Scheme 117 19:30 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide [by video link] I've had concerns in recent weeks about cuts to the NDIS. I'm concerned that this government is slashing NDIS plans by stealth. Constituents have been contacting me by email and telephone and have come in to see me telling me that their NDIS plans have been cut with no rhyme nor reason nor any explanation. If this is the case, we need to be extremely cautious about this, because we know that cutting corners on people's disability plans can lead to such shocking incidents as the case of Ann-Marie Smith. The consequences can be dangerous if funding and corners are cut. It is therefore even more shocking that this government appears intent on watering down the NDIS. For example, documents leaked from the government's new Sustainability Action Taskforce instruct staff to slow down in getting Australians living with disability onto the NDIS. That's shocking if correct. The reason for this is to keep costs down, we've heard. That's just a sneaky way to introduce cuts. I've been inundated in the last few days with correspondence from people who have had their plan cut, who have had issues with their plan. It is something that is very dangerous to the health of those people and their entire families. I have heard lots of stories. One of them is from Debbie, whose son's NDIS support payments were suddenly cut by $10,000. He is 18 and is on the autism spectrum and has an intellectual disability and epilepsy. The unexplained funding cut reflects a lack of consideration given to the needs of the child and the parent as the child matures and greater support is needed for social communication and challenges, let alone transitioning to adulthood. Then there is Erica, who received the double shock of having her son's funding slashed and extended over 24 months instead of 12. That means less money has to stretch even further, Erica wrote to me. I have received many calls and emails, as I said. Another person who contacted me was Caroline, who has four children, two of whom are on the NDIS, on the respite care program. Their funding has been cut, and now the family is struggling. Both children have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, which can present as an extreme behavioural and emotional response. Respite allowed Caroline, the mother, to have more time to devote to her other two children. Respite was also an important opportunity for Caroline for socialisation and interaction outside the home. These are atrocious cuts without any rhyme or reason. I've also been contacted by Tabitha, who told me that her daughter's funding was cut by 50 per cent for no reason. This is what Tabitha wrote to me: 'As a result we have had to cut one of her therapies completely, and it was the most effective one. There was no reason for this cut. She is still under seven and on early intervention.' That is very sad news. These are real people struggling to provide their children and families with the best possible care and assistance. The funding cuts introduced by the current government are hurting these families and the NDIS participants living with a disability. How can people have faith in this government when this government has presided over $4.6 billion being ripped out of the NDIS? People are receiving services they don't need and being denied services they asked for. There are difficult and complicated application processes. One thousand two hundred Australians with disability have died while waiting to be funded by the scheme. There have been tricks, and they are trying to ram through this unpopular independence assessment scheme. Why should people living with disability have anything less that the best, as the program was designed? The NDIS is a right and we all have to fight to protect it. I'll continue to listen to my constituents and people using the scheme to ensure the basic principles of choice and dignity are upheld for Australians living with disability. Richmond, Mr Tom 118 19:35 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra I want to pay tribute to a great historian and lifelong educator who passed away in September. Tom Richmond was born on 4 July 1941 at Hornsby. He was the son of Bob and May Richmond and was raised in the family home at Asquith. He and his family had deep connections on the Hawkesbury River. From 1861 his great-grandfather Vincent William Seymour began farming in the Brooklyn area. Seymour's dairy farm was located at the site of the shire's most recently constructed sports field. The field is known as Old Dairy and was officially opened by Tom himself in January 2016 when he bowled the first ball at the inaugural cricket match played there. Tom attended Barker College, where he excelled despite being one of the youngest in his year. In year 12, he was selected for Barker's first-11 cricket team. He began his teaching career in 1960 in the small town of Woodenbong close to the Queensland border. In 1962 he transferred to another Northern New South Wales town and taught at Bonalbo Central School. In 1964 he was appointed to Normanhurst Boys High, in my electorate, where he taught English and history for four years. While teaching at Normanhurst, he completed his arts degree through the University of New England. While in this role, he involved himself in students' academic, sporting and welfare activities and was a lieutenant in the school's cadet corp. In 1968 he transferred and was promoted to head English teacher at Riverstone High at the age of 27. This made him one of the youngest teachers to hold that position. When Galston High opened, in 1974, Tom became head teacher in both English and history. While teaching at Galston he became known as a leader in the field of local history education and took part in curriculum development related to teaching local history. He also took on the challenging project of restoring a rundown sandstone building known as Waddell Cottage on the school grounds. Over the next few decades, Tom had several similar roles at Windsor High, Ku-ring-gai High and Evans High. Tom retired in 1995 due to poor health, concluding 36 years of world-class high-school teaching. Tom also coached cricket for 50 years—from school teams to club and representative level. Tom was a member of the Hornsby Shire Historical Society for half a century. In his retirement, he published five books: The Brooklyn Federation Village; Love Among the Prawns; Brooklyn Underground; Bar Island and Lower Hawkesbury; and 1906: The Birth of Hornsby Shire. In recent times, Nathan Tilbury has become his key historical collaborator and protege. In addition to Tom's published work, he wrote various other local histories on the Brooklyn Public School, the history of policing in Brooklyn, the Brooklyn Cemetery, and local and Aboriginal history, for which he had a huge interest. From 2006, for nearly 14 years, he wrote a weekly historical column for the Hornsby Advocate. Meticulously researched and beautifully written, it was the first column I read when I opened the paper, and I always learned something. In recent times, Tom created his own regular hardcopy newsletter, which he named The Brooklyn Bugle. It presented a history of the Brooklyn area and was distributed locally for free. He gave hundreds of copies of this local history to various to community groups. Tom was awarded several prestigious awards, including the Order of Australian Medal for service to youth through sport education and the Australian Sports Medal for services to cricket, and he was the winner of the Hornsby Shire Heritage Award. Tom's moto when it came to history, particularly his own work, was that history is owned by all and needs to be shared. Tom lived his final 40 years at Brooklyn on the property where his mother was born, and the land was acquired by his grandparents in 1906. I met Tom early in my time as an MP. Nathan Tilbury told me that Tom was disappointed I hadn't been to see him and pick his brain about issues and understand what Brooklyn was really all about. I remember that first meeting very well. Tom was so full of stories and information, and he was such a great source of what was really happening on the river. We became great friends. I was honoured when Tom offered to send a letter to his fellow Brooklyn residents supporting my re-election in 2019. All of our community owes a great debt to Tom for giving us a greater appreciation of who we are as a community. Tom recently said: 'If I were to divide my life into major sectional interests, I'd place education at the top. Further down the ladder, I'd certainly include local history research. In essence, however, my work in this area has been educational, because my main aim has been to heighten the awareness of the community with regard to our magnificent historical heritage.' Tom Richmond was a much-loved member of our community. In his declining years he had greater difficulty walking and perhaps greater difficulty in looking after himself as well. Whenever you saw him, he would drive up to you in his car and take quite some time to get out of the car, and he always looked a little dishevelled. But that was also part of his raffish river charm. Tom was a much-loved member of our community and he'll be missed by many. May his memory be an inspiration to his family, his friends and to all those who knew him. Hospitals 119 19:40 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley Public health sits at the intersection of individual responsibility and collective action, two concepts that the Morrison government appears to have no grasp of at this point. Throughout COVID, every state and territory government across the country has made tough decisions in the face of intense public scrutiny and stakes to protect the health and wellbeing of Australians. As state and territory governments set out their plans to end COVID lockdowns and open up their domestic borders we know that our public hospitals, including the Prince Charles Hospital in my electorate of Lilley will be under increased pressure. To alleviate some of that pressure, every single state and territory government has joined together to write to the Morrison government, asking to continue the current fifty-fifty public hospital funding agreement until 2023. What was the Morrison government's response? They accused the state government of extortion. That's pretty rich from a government which was extorted by its own MPs this week to agree on net zero emissions by 2050. Just in case the Morrison government has forgotten, taxpayer money is meant for important things like adequately resourced public hospitals. It's not for paying off the Nationals for net zero. The government's refusal to continue this fifty-fifty funding agreement isn't just short-sighted and selfish. It is an insult to the health workers who have been through hell over COVID for 18 months and beyond, and who will continue to bear the brunt of the overburdened public hospital system when the lockdowns and the border controls end. I call on the Morrison government to end the political games and the finger-pointing, to do the right thing and protect the health and safety of all Australians by extending the fifty-fifty public hospital funding agreement. I would thank our Lilley health workers, who have done such a brilliant job in keeping northsiders safe from COVID outbreaks. The Prince Charles Hospital hosts the COVID ward for northern Brisbane, so it is our health workers who are looking after our COVID afflicted patients, and they are themselves the most at risk. We are also proud to host the Boondall vaccine clinic at the Brisbane Entertainment Centre—proud host to AC/DC concerts in the past and where my very first concert, Blink-182, was. Now it hosts our max vax clinic. Thank you to everybody who has made that possible. When I speak to northsiders at mobile offices and community events, no matter what side of politics they're from, they always agree that Medicare makes Australia special. The value of Australia's public health system is no more apparent than after battling a pandemic. It was our public health system that kept us safe. But there's growing concern in Lilley about the Americanisation of Medicare and of our public health system under consecutive LNP governments. Northsiders know that having an LNP government isn't just bad for our hip pockets, it's bad for our health. Since the LNP came to power in 2013, the cost of seeing a specialist or going to a GP for a check-up has become shockingly more expensive. In 2013, the average out-of-pocket cost to see a specialist was $59.70. In 2020, the average out-of-pocket cost to see a specialist was $92.37. That's an increase of $32.67, or 55 per cent in the eight years of the Liberal-National government. In 2013, the average out-of-pocket cost to see a GP was $27.86. In 2020, the average out-of-pocket cost to see a GP was $39.36. That's a 34 per cent increase in out-of-pocket costs to see a GP under this third-term government. The LNP has dismissed this figure to me as not that much. But if you're a pensioner or if you have three kids who each need to see their GP several times a year, or if you are receiving JobSeeker, that increase takes a decent chunk out of your household budget. And these increased GP costs don't just hit household budgets they hit our public hospital system too. At the start of October Queensland was experiencing four code yellow alerts across North Queensland hospitals in unison, signalling major capacity issues. While the Queensland LNP was quick to blame the Palaszczuk government, the fact is that when people can't afford to see their GP or to see a specialist for a medical issue, they put it off for as long as possible, and that means that they end up in our emergency departments. It isn't good enough, and Queenslanders shouldn't be forced into emergency rooms because they cannot afford preventative health care because of Medicare cards. Under the LNP, protecting the health of your family will always cost more. I thank the House. Chisholm Electorate: Ashwood Reserve 120 19:45 Ms LIU 282918 Chisholm [by video link] Today I would like to talk about a proposed sports infrastructure project in my electorate of Chisholm. The Waverley Hockey Club is looking to expand by constructing a second hockey pitch at Ashwood Reserve. This would mean that the club would be able to better support its members by providing the facilities for its teams, especially the women's team, to practise and play more games at home. A central issue that has prevented Waverley Hockey Club and another key supporter of the project, Monash City Council, from progressing further has been that several other local groups make use of Ashwood Reserve. The Victorian Sikh Association is one of those groups. I had the pleasure of meeting with its representatives, Manjit Singh, Jag Bal and others last week. The VSA is a wonderful organisation committed to sharing their Sikh heritage through sports, cultural exchanges and active community participation. It is also an inclusive group which, despite its natural Sikh focus, welcomes people of all backgrounds to take part in its events and activities. Members of the VSA are justifiably worried about the future of their club and the possibility that they may need to move from their current home at Ashwood Reserve. That is why it was an important development that council resolved recently to recognise the need to accommodate the group and voted to only consider a project funding proposal in relation to Ashwood Reserve if funding for the cost associated with relocating the VSA was also received. It is vital that council follow-up this resolution with a detailed report on possible relocation options. This report should be completed as soon as possible. It is also absolutely necessary that it takes into account the views and preferences of the VSA. So I was heartened to see that council has resolved to work with the group on this matter going forward. I will do all that I can to ensure that council keeps its commitment. Ensuring that the report is completed without delay will be beneficial to all involved. The hockey club can begin to pursue funding opportunities with a clearer cost figure in mind and the VSA leadership will be able to begin consulting with members to make a decision as to whether they will support a move away from Ashwood Reserve. The broader community and some locals who I know are concerned about losing access to parts of the reserve will also have a better idea of what is being proposed. As a final matter, I want to thank the representatives of the VSA I mentioned previously, as well as those from Waverley Hockey Club, particularly Brett Thompson and Drew Ashton. This has been a long and at times frustrating process for those involved, but both clubs have conducted themselves and treated each other with respect and dignity, and I commend them for that. Whatever the ultimate outcome, I can truly say that I am proud that Chisholm is home to these groups. I wish both clubs a very, very good future. Death Penalty, Cook, Mr Luke 120 19:50 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler On 10 October we commemorated World Day Against the Death Penalty. On that day we as a nation and concerned members of the international community reaffirmed our commitment to the ultimate pursuit of a world free of the death penalty. As I've expressed in this place on many occasions, I believe capital punishment is the cruellest and most inhumane response to crime. My opposition to capital punishment is universal, and it's not just when Australian lives are at stake. The death penalty is invariably associated with the miscarriage of justice, the inevitable consequence being the execution of innocents and the disproportionate execution of the poor and of ethnic and religious minorities. Clearly, no legal system is free of error, but the death penalty is irreversible. As long as the death penalty exists innocent people will be executed. To this end, I'd like to draw the attention of the House to a very significant outcome that was reached only last month with respect to an Australian national, Mr Luke Cook. Mr Cook was arrested and sentenced to death in Thailand after being convicted of drug related crimes. On appeal, Mr Cook fortunately not only escaped the death penalty but also had all charges against him withdrawn. Mr Cook, happily, now has returned to Australia. I'm pleased to have worked on Mr Cook's matter together with Senator Dean Smith, my fellow Co-chair of Australian Parliamentarians Against the Death Penalty, engaging all diplomatic efforts to reach a positive outcome in this case. I specifically want to also acknowledge the tremendous work of the Capital Punishment Justice Project, and in particular acknowledge the commitment and dedication of Australian lawyers Simone Abel, Sarah Kowal and Stephen Keim SC. They were instrumental in providing effective legal representation of Mr Cook and in preparing an amicus brief to assist the court, which certainly provided a determining factor in this matter. The Capital Punishment Justice Project undertakes significant work in promoting the worldwide abolition of the death penalty and in supporting pro bono work, ensuring the effective legal representation and just outcomes for those individuals facing the death penalty. As was evident in Mr Cook's case, effective legal representation is crucial for a successful outcome, an outcome of life and death, which we now know in his case could have gone the wrong way, and an innocent man would have been executed. I also take this opportunity to thank the Australian Ambassador to Thailand, Mr Allan McKinnon, and his team for the support they gave to Mr Cook over his four-year ordeal. I particularly thank the ambassador for his timely intervention in the days leading up to Mr Cook's appeal. Not only is there room for mistakes in cases involving the death penalty, I've got to say that the most incredible research also indicates that capital punishment does not deter crime. I believe that in a modern society like ours there are adequate means to punish offenders for their crimes, but there is also the ability to assist people with their rehabilitation. The international community has a long way to go towards the abolition of the death penalty, although recent statistics show significant improvement. They show that 144 countries have now abolished the death penalty, as compared to only 16 in 1977. Unfortunately, that leaves 55 countries which are actively deploying the death penalty. Australia can be proud of its longstanding and principled opposition to capital punishment, including our whole-of-government strategy in pursuing the global abolition of the death penalty. Nevertheless, we have a responsibility to continue to use our various platforms to encourage, inspire and support other nations in their move towards abolition. After all, we have a responsibility to work towards justice and the advancement of human rights, and this includes the most important right of all: the right to life itself. I conclude with the profound words of a former Chief Justice of the South African Constitutional Court, Ismail Mahomed: The death penalty sanctions the deliberate annihilation of life. As I have previously said it "is the ultimate and the most incomparably extreme form of punishment … involving … the planned and calculated termination of life itself; the destruction of the greatest and most precious gift which is bestowed on all humankind". I remain inspired by these words, and I am proud to be associated with the Capital Punishment Justice Project. Abdominoplasty Surgery 121 19:55 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid Bringing new life into the world is an incredibly positive and life-changing event for many parents, but we know that for some parents the delivery of the baby may result in physical or psychological injury or a combination of both. One of those physical injuries which can occur as a direct result of the birthing process is abdominal separation or abdominal tearing, which can affect one in three women. Abdominal tearing refers to tearing, stretching or rupturing of the abdominal muscles caused during pregnancy. Women who have multiple births or larger-than-average babies are more likely to experience this type of injury. It can cause chronic lower back pain and urinary incontinence that impacts a woman's quality of life, her mental and physical health, her relationships and her ability to care for her children. It also impacts the decision to have more children and her capacity to return to the workforce. For some women, it even impairs their ability to lift or carry their own children. Abdominal separation in pregnant and postnatal women is first treated through physiotherapy, where the condition may resolve naturally. However, evidence has shown that this treatment has limited success in severe cases. Recent studies have shown that abdominoplasty surgery has high success rates for this type of injury, but for many women this life-changing surgery is just out of reach. Some women have to access their superannuation to pay for the surgery, while others have taken out loans. In some cases, women have had to save for the surgery, which costs up to $15,000. This time last year, I stood in this House and presented a petition which had been signed by over 13,000 individuals. Started by my constituent in Reid Kerrie Edwards, this petition called for the reinstatement of the MBS item for abdominoplasty surgery for women with abdominal tearing caused by pregnancy, a medical condition also known as diastasis recti. I am pleased to say that late last month the Medical Services Advisory Committee listened to the voices of thousands of women and men across Australia who have been calling for this surgery to again be covered under Medicare. MSAC listened to the evidence, and it has recommended to the health minister that this surgery once again be subsidised. This is welcome news for the one in three Australian mothers who are living with physical injury and mental distress as a result of birth trauma. It's welcome news to the women who have campaigned for years to have this surgery once again covered under Medicare. I want to thank the thousands of women who have told me their personal stories. I know this news brings hope and relief to them. This type of surgery in the past has been too easily dismissed as a cosmetic procedure when in fact it restores dignity and quality of life to women enduring chronic pain, incontinence and diminished ability to care for their own children. This outcome is also a victory on the long path in lifting taboos related to women's health. When we improve perinatal care in Australia, we remove stigmas and financial barriers, we support Australian families and we increase workforce participation for women, to the benefit of our nation. I also want to acknowledge and thank my colleagues Bridget Archer, Dr Katie Allen and Celia Hammond for their support of that petition and all the other members of this House who added their voices to the petition and to the calls to have the surgery covered under Medicare again. But, most importantly, I would like to thank Kerrie Edwards for her tireless efforts. She was driven by her own experience of abdominal separation, and I hope she has found time to pause and reflect on the incredible outcome of her advocacy: the countless women who will be supported, the new mums who will have greater quality of life because of her advocacy. I am also pleased to see that the government have made clear their commitment to listing abdominoplasty on the MBS as soon as possible, and I acknowledge the health minister for his personal commitment to this issue. House adjourned at 19:59 NOTICES 122 NOTICES QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS 123 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS Climate Change 123

Monday, 25 October 2021

The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Rob Mitchell) took the chair at 10:30.

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 125 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Scullin Electorate: COVID-19 125 10:30 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin As you'd be well aware, Mr Deputy Speaker Mitchell, for Melburnians the past few days have been very emotional. People have been reconnecting with the things they've been so desperate to be doing and, even more importantly, with the people they love. Let me be clear: I rise here to say they have earned it. The people of Melbourne have been magnificent over the last 18 months. I'm so proud to be a Melburnian and so proud of what Melburnians, and in particular people in the electorate of Scullin, have achieved. I acknowledge the great leadership of our Premier, Daniel Andrews, and Brett Sutton, who have been consistent in keeping people and communities safe and communicating effectively what they have been doing in the interests of our communities. But it's the people of Melbourne at large whom I want to acknowledge here. There have been so many cynical and opportunistic voices talking us down and, in fact, putting people and communities at risk, but Melburnians have stood strong against them. Frontline workers—healthcare workers, retail workers, cleaners—have done an incredible job. A big shout-out to the teachers, who've done an incredible job of managing learning from home. But our successes are the work of everyone—people who've sacrificed so much to stay safe and to keep all of us safe, with care, selflessness and compassion. I say again: thank you to everyone. There are so many inspiring stories that I could tell. I'm sure you could too, Deputy Speaker, as could my friend the member for Jagajaga, who is in the Chamber. There have been so many acts of generosity and leadership: neighbours checking in on each, the pop-up vaccination clinics, including the ones that are open right now—and I think about the Macedonian community and their cultural centre in High Street—making sure that everyone has the chance to stay protected. One thing that has been clear to me, and concerning to me, is the way in which this pandemic has exposed cracks and weaknesses in our society, and how it has affected some in the community more than others. This is an important question that governments should be addressing right now, and an Albanese Labor government will address it, but there is an example that we can have regard to—that is, the behaviour of the people I'm so proud to represent in this place. The people of Melbourne have recognised that some people have dealt with the pain of restrictions better than others, that some people have been left more isolated than others, and the way in which they have responded has been nothing short of inspirational. I'm so proud of everyone that I represent for all that they have done, and I really hope that everyone can stay safe and enjoy these hard-won freedoms. Walsh, Richie 125 10:33 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner I rise today to celebrate the life of the little legend that is Richie Walsh, the most inspiring boy that I have ever met. My introduction to the Walsh family was in October last year, when I helped them seek permanent residency here in Australia, in my electorate of Bonner, so Richie could receive treatment for a rare form of cancer that he was battling. What started out as an initial request for support very quickly evolved into a special bond. Richie fought incredibly hard. He loved life and lived it to the fullest—that I will never forget. A few weeks ago I attended a celebration of Richie's life, where all guests were asked to wear the colours of the rainbow in his memory. It was a beautiful ceremony where precious family moments and cherished memories were shared by those nearest and dearest to him. Mr Deputy Speaker, the Walsh family are truly remarkable. During this time their enormous heart for helping others hasn't diminished. Everywhere Richie went, he took his headphones and his iPad. He was famous for them. Even Richie's nurse said that she'd never seen him without them. With the Bonner community as well as many Australians across the country touched by Richie's story and legacy, the family asked that condolences for Richie be in the form of donations so that they could send iPads engraved with his name to every bed in the oncology ward at the Queensland Children's Hospital. In just under one week, the Walsh family have smashed their fundraising target for the Queensland Children's Hospital, and 27 engraved iPads are now on their way to children on the oncology ward. But the family isn't stopping there. They are now fundraising to send another batch of iPads not only to the children's hospital here in Brisbane but also to every bed on the oncology ward at Perth Children's Hospital. They aren't limiting themselves to Australia, either. They are planning to send iPads to the children battling cancer in Richie's home town of Manchester in the UK, a beautiful full-circle act of generosity which will touch the lives of so many children and their families around the world. The Walsh family are currently in the process of registering Little Legends for Richie as a charity to raise funds for children battling cancer and their families. They already have a dedicated team onboard to help with all the work and planning involved with registering this charity and making sure that it honours Richie's life. I will keep sharing Richie's legacy. He can always count on me to be in his corner. Rest easy, little legend. National Disability Insurance Scheme 126 10:35 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga I remain very concerned about the way the NDIS is operating under this Morrison government. Under this government, the NDIS is not delivering for people with disability, their families and their carers as it should. Even while the government says it's scrapped its plan for independent assessments—and I very much hope that we can trust the government on that—we know that participants and families at the moment remain fearful about reviews. They remain fearful about decisions that they don't understand and that are inconsistent. I hear far too many stories from my constituents of long battles with people trying to have their plans reviewed or people trying to get support that is reasonable and necessary. Individuals and families come to my office and they're worn out. They're worn out from some kind of bureaucratic battle, where they can't get to the bottom of why they're not getting the support that they should get. Of course, I do what I can to fight for better outcomes for those people. But until we get a Labor government in place, a government that understands the values and that backs the NDIS, we are not going to get the support that people with disability, their families and their communities deserve to help them to live a good and decent life. Jagajaga local Anne-Marie reached out to my office after she experienced a delay in a response from the NDIS regarding a new wheelchair that she really needed. Anne-Marie suffers from myasthenia gravis, a chronic complex autoimmune disorder in which antibodies destroy neuromuscular connections. She also has around 15 spinal compression fractures. My office asked the NDIA what was going on with her wheelchair request and the reason for the delay. This is the response we got: 'The updated quote provided by Anne-Marie couldn't be considered at the time as there was an active internal review which limits the planner from making updates to the plan. I understand Anne-Marie withdrew the internal review, but it appears the planner was not aware this had occurred.' What does that even mean? This is a wheelchair that is essential for someone's way of life, and that's how they're being dealt with. It's a disgrace. According to Anne-Marie, the lifting mechanism on this wheelchair would help her immensely. It would help her to transfer from the chair to bed, to the car, to the shower et cetera. Shortly after I made a representation on Anne-Marie's behalf, she was given an outcome: she was given the wheelchair, as reasonable and necessary, but she was not given this lift component that would allow her to use the chair for all those purposes. It does not make sense. The NDIS under this government is not operating as it should. This is just one example of many that have come to my office, and I know other examples have come to many of my colleagues' offices. We are doing all we can to fix these problems for individual cases, but what we need is a system that works for all these people. We need a scheme that works for all these people and a government that will back the NDIS. Sunshine Coast Electorate: Education 126 10:38 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher My mission is to help make the Sunshine Coast the place to be for education, employment and retirement. To make that a reality as we look forward from COVID-19, we need to encourage growth in new sectors, like health care and high-tech manufacturing, and we need to ensure local young people are ready to take on the smart jobs of the future in these sectors on the Sunshine Coast. That's why recently I was pleased to deliver a grant of $524,455 from the Morrison government to the MIE Lab project, organised by dedicated University of the Sunshine Coast lecturer Natalie McMaster. The MIE Lab provides evidence based on early interventions in schools focusing on crystallising students' burgeoning interest in science and technology. It helps our students to recognise their abilities and potentials in STEM, breaks down gender stereotypes to encourage more young women to pursue these careers and demonstrates the relevance of STEM study to getting a great future job. The Morrison government's funding will extend the reach of the MIE Lab program from an initial pilot to engaging with 5,000 more students across 50 additional schools, and it'll support the presentation of 15 STEM-focused career education workshops for parents and carers throughout the South East Queensland region. MIE Labs came about because of USC technologist Peter Embleton's vision to use day-to-day electronics to help students of all ages and abilities to understand the way of thinking used in STEM. Now, thanks to Natalie and Peter's hard work, this project leaves behind not only thousands of inspired students but teachers with new skills to encourage and develop that interest right across our region. MIE Labs will complement the incredible RoboCoast program, led by the incredibly dedicated Chancellor State College teacher Simon Richardson, which is already operating in my community. The RoboCoast program brings robots and robotics clubs into schools across South East Queensland—in fact, right around the country. I want to thank Simon for hosting me and MIE Labs at Chancellor to launch the new funding announcement. Simon introduced us to some incredible young students who, inspired by his work, are already founding technology companies in their spare time. Binara Wasala in grade 12, for example, has been running his own design and 3D printing business, Binary Designer, for the past two years, working with dozens of clients, from hobbyists to local food manufacturers, while Tahlia Harris has begun a not-for-profit, Gear Up Robotics, to go into Indigenous communities in North Queensland with robotics equipment to spread the STEM message. Congratulations, Tahlia and Binara, and all the young students starting their own businesses. Youth Voice in Parliament Week 127 10:41 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur The COVID-19 pandemic has been a very difficult and confusing time for all of us. There are many loud voices being heard around the country. One voice that we don't hear very often is the voice of young people. I'm very pleased to read in parliament today the speech from a young man from South Western Sydney, 14-year-old Sabri Sabri, and his vision for our future. It's very important that we do not just pay lip-service to our young people but that we listen to their voices and do what we can to make sure they fulfil their potential. Sabri is a bright and forward-thinking 14-year-old from South Western Sydney, and this is his speech: Australia needs to be well harnessed for our future mainly when we are seeing enhanced technology being released every year from phones to air conditioners. I would love to see big retailers manufacture technology in Australia it will boost our economy and our job growth and also we will need to embrace and create new master piece technologies, such as artificial intelligence and biotechnology in Australian industries, and reduce emissions to maintain a globally competitive equal quality lifestyle for our citizens. With the nations population expected to rise we need to stand shoulder to shoulder and boost infrastructure and services to help create more growth and strengthen our economy. If this is looked upon it could result in a financially well harnessed and highly-skilled dynamical enhanced Australian future. That's a great speech, Sabri, and who could argue with your thoughts? It's very important, as I've said, that we listen to the voices of our young people. I don't believe they have been heard with any sufficient force during the pandemic, and they are the ones whose futures we need to make sure will be as prosperous and as dynamic as ours have been. Our young people need to be supported in a whole range of ways: better technology, vocational education in schools. Vocational education hubs in every high school in the country would be something that would be very important for our young people. Better access to high-technology university courses for all concerned would be another great advantage to our young people. Listening to their voices about things like housing affordability and health care would again be very important. We are not listening to our young people, and it's very important that we do listen to them and act on what they want. I'm very proud to be part of the Raise Our Voice in Parliament's campaign for Australia's youth. It's very important that we continue to listen to our young people and listen to what their wants and vision for the future are. COVID-19 127 10:44 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey As of yesterday afternoon, there have been over two million vaccine shots administered in South Australia. That represents 79 per cent first dose and 62.3 per cent second dose. While this is a significant mark, we are obviously lagging behind primarily New South Wales, ACT and Victoria. To those who choose not to get vaccinated, let me say that this is where the rubber hits the road. The reason we are not yet able to open the borders in South Australia is that those rates are not as high as are required by the national road map, so I urge those who haven't got vaccinated thus far to do so. Having said that, I think we are victims of our success, if you like. In those jurisdictions that have not had the high case numbers, it seems there is less of a sense of urgency within the community. So I'm not sure that we are nailed onto a higher percentage of people who will not get vaccinated, but certainly at this stage, we have a higher percentage of people who are not vaccinated. I continue to field a few calls in my office from people upset about the fact that they have restrictions and upset about the concept of a 'vaccine passport'. I've been trying to make the point that, when it comes to international borders, it's the Australian government that's in control. At this stage, we have very few coming into Australia full stop, and the federal government has moved to come up with an electronic proof of vaccination which, firstly, may facilitate movements into Australia and then may make life easier for people as they move around their states and their communities. The point is, of course, that it is the states' rights, and they choose whether or not they let people over their borders. I have a lot of people raise with me section 92 of the Constitution, but I can assure them that the Biosecurity Act actually allows states to exercise these rights. So, while people may not be happy about it, it is the state regimes they need to deal with. States have the rights and they also have the responsibility of protecting their citizens. Similarly, businesses have the right and the responsibility to protect their workers and their customers as well, and we're seeing now a number of large employers around Australia state that they will only have vaccinated workers on their workforce. We know that that happened with the airlines first, and now with Coles, I think, and Woolworths. BHP said that their workers will be vaccinated by the end of January. So, while people might have a bit of a vent around it, these things aren't within the government's control. But I think they're right and proper, and I applaud those companies that are actually taking that stance. Not all evil originates in Canberra, I might say, so hang with us. Get vaccinated. Let's get us over the line and they'll get those borders open. Armenia 128 10:47 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter I'm proud that, for many years now—more recently, with the member for North Sydney—I've co-convened the Australia-Armenia parliamentary group. My relationship with the community was, in part, born out of the relationship that the Anzacs forged with Armenian forces during the First World War and, of course, my interest in the terrible events of 1915 known as the Armenian genocide. It's been a little more than a year since Azerbaijan launched indiscriminate and unprovoked attacks against the Republic of Artsakh. Formerly known as Nagorno-Karabakh, the former Soviet Union satellite remains occupied by Turkish-backed Azerbaijani forces. The Azerbaijani invasion resulted in the death of around 5,000 young Armenian men. Azerbaijani forces destroyed civilian infrastructure, including hundreds of schools and places of worship. More than 100,000 innocent civilians have been displaced. The Australian Armenian community has been in a state of overwhelming devastation, shock, and despair as they've witnessed their homeland desecrated at the hands of Azerbaijani forces, including paid Turkish-backed Syrian mercenaries. The relative silence of the international community is, of course, of great concern to the Armenian diaspora. Azerbaijan's military aggression against indigenous Armenians in Artsakh involved alleged war crimes using cluster and white phosphorus munitions and attacks on Armenian churches, hospitals, civilians and schools. Armenians around the world are rallying to assist those who were displaced, to their great credit. Australian Armenians have joined the diaspora around the world in calling for the international community to call out Azerbaijan and to stop their belligerent activities. Australia should do just that. A number of countries, including France and the USA, and bodies such as the European parliament have rightly publicly condemned Azerbaijan's deliberate violations of international law. We should join with the many across the globe by making our unhappiness about the situation in Artsakh well known and by recognising the right to self-determination for the people of Artsakh. The conflict is a test for the robustness of our international architecture and the rules based order we all rely so much upon. We must pass the test. du Plessis, Dr Charl, O'Connor Electorate: Health and Emergency Service Workers 128 10:50 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor First and foremost, I acknowledge the dedicated work of Dr Charl du Plessis, who practices medicine in some of the most remote northern Goldfields towns and Aboriginal communities in my electorate of O'Connor. Dr du Plessis is a much loved doctor whose skill and professionalism have been acknowledged by his peers in the awarding of the prestigious Royal Australian College of General Practitioners 2021WA GP of the Year. Dr du Plessis has resided and worked in some of O'Connor's most harsh and challenging climatic and social environments for the last 10 years. While his family currently live in Perth, he is a regular feature at the Leonora and Laverton hospitals' GP clinics and conducts outreach clinics to Aboriginal communities like Cosmo Newbery. Dr du Plessis's dedication to his patients came to the fore during COVID, when he chose to remain locked down with his communities when they were sealed off from the rest of WA as a dedicated biosecurity zone. While many services deserted these remote communities, Dr du Plessis knew he would be required to support the many chronic and complex health and emotional needs of his patients at a time of such great uncertainty. Dr du Plessis also plays an important role in supporting the frontline health and emergency service providers who are working under great pressure in these communities. So I take this opportunity not only to congratulate Dr du Plessis on his well-deserved award, but also to send a big shout out to the health and emergency service workers in the northern Goldfields—people like Ken Hart, the sole St John community paramedic for the northern Goldfields. Ken is on call 24/7, dealing with the victims of family and domestic violence, alcohol-related harm, self-harms, car accidents and major medical emergencies. Ken often requires the backup from local police officers like Leonora station's Sergeant Jamie Cresswell and officer Tom Clendinning. This dedicated team works under constant pressure. Together, they support the wonderful Royal Flying Doctor Service, who are regularly called out to the northern Goldfields, sometimes carrying out multiple medical evacuations in a day. On the ground, and embedded in her community, is Naomi Sprigg dos Santos, who has child safety as her No. 1 priority in her role with the WA Country Health Service. Pharmacist John Coufos is the only pharmacist for hundreds of kilometres, filling prescriptions, giving sound advice on complex health conditions and supporting childcare and dietary needs. Hope Community Services counsellors Sam Doran and Norma Ashwin also help support the myriad of mental health needs in the northern Goldfields, including those affected by FASD, chronic alcoholism and drug use, sex abuse and domestic and family violence. Finally, to all the nurses and carers, and especially those who volunteer: thank you from the bottom of my heart. You all deserve an award, just like Dr du Plessis, in recognition of the selfless and tireless work you all do, keeping our northern Goldfields communities as safe, healthy and livable as possible. Cunningham Electorate: Schools 129 10:53 Ms BIRD DZP Cunningham Today, across New South Wales, children and young people are returning to school. It's been just a delight, as you look through your Facebook feed, to see all the photos of the smiling, happy, joyful faces—as well as the children who are smiling, happy and joyful, not just the parents! So it's been a really nice start to the day. I want to extend my very best wishes to all of those students. We do understand, of course, that academic engagement at school is very important, but so is the social side of young people's development—being with their friends and teachers—and I'm sure they're all very much looking forward to it today. I do want to acknowledge that there are a couple of schools across my region who won't be going back today because each is closed for a deep clean after being the site of a close contact. Of course, that will continue to be a challenge for our schools. I'm very much of the view, and I know the teachers union have expressed this, that we need to make sure we're doing all that we can to ensure the schools are safe places. In that vein, I want to extend a huge thankyou to all of the parents who have put so much effort into homeschooling over the last couple of months. In particular I acknowledge the many parents who were working at home as well as doing homeschooling. It was a really tough ask of them, and it's clear that parents have just stepped up. They've done that with the absolute support and backing of the school teachers and support staff. They've done an extraordinary job, going to online learning, engaging with students and keeping in contact with them. It's a really extraordinary accomplishment by each and every one of them, and I want to extend my great thanks to all of them for that work. I also want to acknowledge that schools did continue to operate to provide an opportunity for the children of essential workers to be at school when their parents had to be on the front line. That, of course, happened in child care as well, and I want to acknowledge all the teachers, educators and support staff in our childcare system who were doing the same thing over recent months. Education is such a critically important part of a child's life, a young person's life. Of course, over coming weeks, our HSC students are going into their final exams after all of those years of schooling. It's been a really tough year for them, as it was for the group who did their HSC last year. A great campaign is running, saying, 'You've got this.' We have great confidence in you, and we look forward to you giving an amazing contribution to our community in the future. Domestic and Family Violence 129 10:56 Mrs WICKS 241590 Robertson I rise to speak about a new program that really will help those experiencing domestic violence in our community. We know that the statistics are far too high and that the experience is all too common. Certainly, I know all of us around Australia are saying no to domestic and family violence. Certainly, the Morrison government is absolutely committed to ending domestic, family and sexual violence. We know a lot about physical abuse in relationships. We are learning more and more about the emotional abuse, about gaslighting, about coercive control, about the many ways that women, and men, who are experiencing this sort of abuse are made to feel worthless, less than a sense of self and an inability to control even their most basic of circumstances: safety in the home. Something like economic abuse, which might involve interfering with work, or controlling or withholding money, really reduces a woman's ability to leave a violent or an abusive relationship. That's why the Morrison government has established the escaping violence payment. From July 2020 to June 2021, there were almost 1,500 reported incidents of domestic violence on the Central Coast. I do want to emphasise that these are reported incidents, not a total of the unreported incidents, which means that, per 100,000 people on the Central Coast, around 415 people have experienced domestic violence in this last year. The escaping violence payment will mean that anyone in our region leaving a violent relationship with have access of a one-off amount of up to $5,000 to help them live a life free of violence. When a woman is fleeing violence, we know that the size of the house that she's fleeing doesn't matter. Often she will bundle the kids and maybe the family pet into the car. Often they leave with not a lot more than the clothes on their backs. Under a two-year trial of this payment, applicants will receive financial assistance of up to $1,500 in cash, with the remainder available for goods and services or direct payments of bonds, school fees or other support to help establish a safe home. It's important to note that this new payment is not means-tested in a traditional sense, because we know that women from every walk of life can experience violence and we want to encourage them all to reach out for support. The payment isn't taxable. It's not reportable income, and it won't impact on any other social security payments that someone may be receiving. Importantly, the payment is available right now. UnitingCare Australia Consortium has been selected as the service provider to deliver the payments. They'll also support women to engage with other relevant services that support those fleeing violent relationships, and their children. We know that ending domestic and family violence will take more than speaking about it in this place and in these corridors. We need to shift the attitude and culture in this nation. This is certainly a good step forward. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E In accordance with standing order 193 the time for constituency statements has concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 130 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Forestry 130 11:00 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) Australia has a severe timber shortage; (b) a report by the Master Builders Association and the Australian Forest Products Association concludes Australia is heading towards a deficit of 250,000 house frames by 2035; (c) the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment states numerous studies show the need for 400,000 hectares of new plantations over the next decade to meet Australia's demand for timber; (d) data from the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences reveals there are only 2,750 hectares of new plantations of softwood; (e) the Government first promised to expand Australia's timber plantations by 1 billion trees in 2018; and (f) answers to questions in the Senate reveal the concessional loan program set up to help meet the 1 billion trees target is yet to even open after the Government promised $500 million before the last election; (2) acknowledges the impact the timber shortage is having on the construction and forestry industries and those Australians undertaking building and do-it-yourself projects; and (3) conveys its disappointment that the Government has failed to do the necessary work for Australia to have sovereign capability to provide softwood and to grow jobs across the forestry and construction sectors. It is time the Prime Minister took responsibility for the severe timber shortage that is being felt right across Australia. In my electorate alone, we are seeing home construction delays of up to 18 months, and this is an area that was devastated by bushfires. That could mean an extra 18 months of people being without a home. More broadly, the timber shortage is threatening Australia's construction industry and the jobs it supports across the country. I'm standing here today raising this issue because the timber shortage and the lack of government action would disproportionately affect businesses, individuals and families in my region. We know there are several factors which have contributed to the shortage we're seeing today, including the Black Summer bushfires, which devastated my region and wiped out 40 per cent of the softwood plantation supply in parts of my electorate. The fire impacts have had a serious adverse impact on the future availability of timber products, for at least the next 20 to 30 years, in the South West Slopes and also Bombala. The plantation sector is the most significant socioeconomic contributor to the South West Slopes region. Thousands of jobs are reliant on this sector, through Hyne Timber at Tumbarumba, AKD Softwoods, and Visy in Tumut, and there's an estimated 500 jobs in Bombala and surrounds, through the Dongwha timber mill. Timber processors in Tumut and Tumbarumba fear the timber shortage will lead to people losing their jobs, which would have a devastating impact on these towns. With salvage logging ending, there are fears there won't be enough wood for all the processors in the region to have continued supply at their usual levels. I have spoken to truss and frame business owners across the region, from Bega to Tumut, who also have serious concerns about accessing supply. I've met with Hyne Timber multiple times. They produce about 20 per cent of the wood which goes to housing trusses manufactured in Australia. They, like other industries, are working hard to secure supply from alternative sources, but this means crippling increases to the cost of manufacturing, due to the increased freight costs. This government's bushfire recovery package for processors specifically excluded freight support. While Hyne has found ways to continue in the short term, there is uncertainty about the long-term viability of some of these mills. Without a consistent supply of logs, mills will be forced to close and jobs will be lost. While the bushfires had a significant impact, they were not the only problem. Prior to bushfires, demand in Australia for softwood for house framing was already exceeding local supply. Timber is already being imported from overseas to frame up a fifth of our homes today, but if this shortage isn't addressed we are headed towards a deficit of 250,000 house frames. A lack of action risks the timber shortage becoming an entrenched problem. We'll no longer have the capacity to provide Australian softwood to build Australian homes into the future. A real plan, followed by real action, is needed. This government needs to listen to industry, listen to construction workers and listen to everyday Australians trying to build or renovate their homes, because this timber shortage is affecting everyone. If the government doesn't actually do something, we risk not having adequate supplies of Australian timber not just next year but over the coming decades. The frustrating thing is that this government has been well aware of this. In 2018, the Morrison-Joyce government promised to radically expand Australia's timber plantation by one billion trees. Today, less than one per cent of that goal has been achieved. If we continue at this rate, instead of hitting that target at 2050 it will take over 300 years. The concessional loan program that was set up to help meet the one billion trees target is yet to even open, after the government promised $500 million before the last election. The government has freely admitted the goal that was set is a long way off, but, as usual, the government has offered no answers to explain this policy failure, nor has it shared any plans to fix the problem. As a nation, we cannot afford any reduction of current plantations and this government needs to prioritise building a stronger, more competitive and ecologically sustainable forestry industry. We need to keep timber processing onshore, and we need to ensure there is adequate local supply. We know new trees mean new jobs, particularly in rural and regional areas, but right now the promise of one billion trees is just another one of the Prime Minister's promises. This government has talked a big game on housing construction, but its failures on timber shortage shows it doesn't care enough. It's time for this government to deliver on its promises, or the timber shortages will grow more dire in decades to come. The DEPUTY SPEAKER M3E Is the motion seconded? Ms Templeman 181810 I second the motion and I reserve my right to speak. 11:05 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I begin by thanking the member for Eden-Monaro for giving an old carpenter and joiner like me a chance to speak here in parliament about one of my favourite subjects. Like the most famous scene from Forrest Gump where Forrest receives a lesson from his new army buddy Bubba about the many different ways shrimp can be cooked and eaten, I could take a lot longer than five minutes telling the chamber all about timber—how it's grown, the different species and how it's used—but, out of consideration for members present, I will restrain myself. However, I will not have any suggestion that we talk about wood, because we all know you put wood in a fire and you build things with timber. To understand the shortage that the member for Eden-Monaro refers to, we need to look at why it has come about. This shortage of timber is by no means a sign of the government's failure. It is a sign of the spectacular success, in fact, of the government's hard work and creativity in keeping the construction industry in this country afloat. After COVID-19 struck last year, established builders in my community that I've known for decades were phoning me to tell me that, after August, they simply had no work. Construction on the Sunshine Coast, generating some $6.1 billion a year in our region and employing 19,000 locals, was on the brink of grinding to a halt. Within just a few months, the situation was very different thanks to the Morrison government. I worked closely with the Assistant Treasurer on informing the creation of the government's HomeBuilder program. The impact was immediate and dramatic. Those same builders who'd been facing an economic cliff were almost overnight inundated with more inquiries than they had ever seen before. Nationwide, the 2020-21 financial year produced a record level of 137,170 detached housing starts, an increase of 34.2 per cent on the previous year. Yet HomeBuilder is just one of the Morrison government's many measures to encourage more domestic construction in this country. In the most recent federal budget, the government allocated $124.7 million to support the construction of more public housing stock. We have introduced the First Home Loan Deposit Scheme, the First Home Super Saver Scheme, the family home guarantee and the new home guarantee, which have stimulated huge new demand and seen first home owner numbers at their highest in 15 years. The Morrison government, unashamedly, is all about first home ownership; it is about home ownership. In short, this government's measures are supporting $30 billion worth of construction work across this country. They are saving thousands of jobs in my community, which has been life changing for a wide range of Sunshine Coast locals and their businesses. However, this incredible success has most certainly contributed to a challenge of supply for building materials. The member for Eden-Monaro is right on one thing, when she notes that Master Builders Association is concerned about a deficit of up to 250,000 house frames over the next 15 years. However, the member for Eden-Monaro ignores another important fact also mentioned by masters builders: in 2021 Australia's timber mills massively increased production to meet demand, producing a record three million cubic metres of timber. Yet, despite this record increase in domestic production, we continue to see shortages. This is not, as the member for Eden-Monaro suggests, a problem of domestic supply; it is a short-term problem of global shortages and disruption to the global supply chain. Sweden is seeing its lowest stock of structural timber in 20 years. Sawmills in many parts of the world are under pressure from rising energy costs, while North American supplies are currently impacted by insect damage and recent forest fires. As we all know, container ship capacity is stretched, while road haulage in Europe is suffering from a lack of qualified drivers. At the same time, as economies open up around the world, a backlog of paused construction projects, from China to the United States, are beginning to ramp up again. Demand is rising worldwide at an unprecedented rate. Worldwide production is stalled. In Australia, we've stepped up and produced more timber than we have ever done before. 11:10 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean I rise to support the motion regarding the timber shortage, moved by the member for Eden-Monaro, and to commend her for introducing this important business. The member for Eden-Monaro, since she came to this place last year, has been a strong advocate for a modern forestry industry and for the communities that, in turn, are supported by a strong forestry industry, rightly arguing that this should have been included as part of the national manufacturing strategy. We know that the industry has a critical role to play in relation to housing affordability, with timber shortages having a flow-on effect to the cost of housing around the nation. We also know that sustainable forestry practices can play a significant role in climate change mitigation and adaptation. Australia's forest industries directly employ 80,000 people and contribute more than $24 billion to the economy every year. Across our region, the industry has gone through significant challenges, with the region's softwood timber industry hit hard by the 'black summer' bushfires, with about 40 per cent of the softwood plantations burned—and then, of course, COVID. Nonetheless, despite these challenges, the industry has proven itself in response to bushfires and COVID-19 and has found ways to continue operations despite lockdowns and disruptions to timber supply. But, as the resolution notes, Australia has a severe timber shortage. A report by the MBA and the Australian Forest Products Association concludes that Australia is heading towards a deficit of a quarter of a million house frames by 2035. The Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment states that numerous studies show the need for 400,000 hectares of new plantations over the next decade in order to meet Australia's demand for timber. To put this in perspective, Australia is facing a timber production shortfall that is equivalent to the combined land size of Geelong and Newcastle because we don't have the trees growing in the ground right now to meet that demand. Our timber mills have massively increased production to meet demand through the COVID-induced building boom, as noted by the previous speaker. But across the country we're experiencing severe timber shortages as demand soars and timber imports dry up. Now that some COVID restrictions have eased, you can check for yourself by comparing the current prices in Bunnings with prices this time last year. Australia's two-million-hectare plantation estate has been declining over the past decade, and it's critical to turn that around. An increase of 400,000 hectares in forestry hub regions would be a tiny fraction of the land devoted to agriculture in Australia. This increase won't only create certainly in supply for new homes and buildings. It will also create jobs and increase the supply of sustainable building material—a material that stores carbon and fights climate change. The government first promised to expand Australia's timber plantations by a billion trees in 2018. That year was a great year for this government to make promises, yet answers to questions in the Senate reveal that the concessional loan program, set up to help meet the target of one billion trees, is yet to even open, despite the government promising half a billion before the last election. Just as there have been 1,000 days since the government announced that they would establish a national anticorruption commission, 1,000 days have passed on another promise that this government has failed to deliver on. This is a government that plays the shell-and-pea game without the pea. It's all sizzle and no sausage. Wait for them to attempt to sell the same set of words without follow-up over the coming weeks and months. At the same time, watch them try to blame other parties and jurisdictions for the litany of promises they haven't been able to keep. The opportunity to implement a national strategy has clearly been there, with the national cabinet. To make up for the lost opportunities of the last few years, what is now needed is a national-level strategy to grow our timber plantation estate, including joint commitments to establishing new tree plantings in key strategic timber-processing regions, to achieve that goal of one billion trees. We need policy initiatives to expand plantations and farm forestry to develop sovereign capability. We need to invest in the next generation of forestry workers and we need to recognise the role of sustainable forestry in climate change mitigation. The IPCC has noted: … a sustainable forest management strategy aimed at maintaining or increasing forest carbon stocks, while producing an annual sustained yield of timber, fibre or energy from the forest, will generate the largest sustained mitigation benefit. Sustainable forest industries are part of the solution, not the problem. We need an Albanese Labor government. I commend the motion to the Chamber. 11:15 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker When I arrived in this place in 2013, there was barely a mention of forest policy; there certainly was very limited discussion. There was a lot of chatter around agriculture, and rightly so, but, as I grew up in a timber town, the fact that forestry was receiving almost no attention was something that I took really seriously. I'm pleased to say that as co-chair, with my good friend the member for Hunter, of the Parliamentary Friends of Forestry Industries, I set about changing the debate in two ways. The first was to raise the salience of forestry industries—that is, to talk about the importance of forest industries. HomeBuilder, I should say, has turbocharged that in recent months because of issues around the availability of structural timber. The second, and probably the most powerful, thing we did, from the industry's perspective, was to commit to a bipartisan approach on forestry. We committed to taking the uberpoliticisation of forestry out of the conversation so that we could set forestry on a particular pathway irrespective of who was in government. I hope that with this motion we're not charting another course, because for this industry uncertainty is death. It takes around 30 years to grow a softwood tree to the point at which it can be harvested. Any uncertainty with government policy during that time is critical, and we need to avoid that. Every year or so at meetings of the Parliamentary Friends of Forest Industries, as a symbol of our bipartisan effort, the member for Hunter and I hug. We do that to show that in this place we are one on forestry. I'm disappointed to see that there has now been a breakout of the old way. If we're going to go back to the old way, let me point out something that those opposite need to address—and I say this against a background not of seeking to politicise forestry but of taking a bipartisan approach. The best thing they could do on forestry right now would be to get on the phone to their Labor Party friends in Victoria and Western Australia, who effectively are ending hardwood production in this country. In Victoria's case they've been relatively sensible; they've said that by 2030 the Victorian native forestry industry will be gone. If you're working in native forestry in Victoria, it will be gone by 2030. I said 'relatively sensible', because in Western Australia they've announced that it will be gone by 2024. So if you're working in native forestry in Western Australia your job will be gone in 2024. Those opposite have the temerity to come into this place and say there's a national wood fibre shortage in this country. So there is! That's why we shouldn't be pursuing these kinds of policies. Speaking of the kinds of policies we should be pursuing: it's all about R&D. In the past fortnight we've spoken a lot about net zero. Our forestry industry has an opportunity to play a key role in meeting this target. In an increasingly carbon constrained future, the forest and forest products industry is one of the few well-established carbon positive industries and it sits poised to benefit. Yes, the current timber supply constraints have shone a light on the need to get more trees in the ground, but let's not forget an important parallel need. For the Australian forest and forest products industry to realise its potential as an innovative internationally competitive industry that contributes significantly to economic growth, social wellbeing and environmental sustainability, we need to increase focus on R&D. The industry faces many new opportunities for carbon sequestration and biomass as well as the expansion of wood products to meet demand driven by population growth. National coordinated research and development will increase our sovereign capability and bolster our national modern manufacturing initiatives. In 2016 the federal government initiated a pathway for increased research and development in the sector by the announcement of the establishment of the National Institute for Forest Products Innovation—NIFPI, as it's known—in partnership with the states and industry. I commend the government on this initiative. A hub-and-spoke model sees national coordination and guidance through the Australia-wide NIFPI together with continued, indeed, increased funding for the NIFPIs. I'm very proud to say that the very first NIFPI was established in Mount Gambier, and I for one know that the solution to these shortages is greater R&D in NIFPIs across the country, including the one in my electorate. 11:20 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Sure, Labor supports bipartisanship when there's a plan and Labor supports bipartisanship when there's action. But Labor doesn't support bipartisanship to do nothing, which is what we've seen from this government. This government is great at talking about building and great at talking about planting—in fact, the government promised that it would plant a billion trees in timber plantations. That's what was announced in 2018, but how many trees have been planted? That's my question to the government. They've been in government for eight years, so I ask: since the announcement back in 2018—remember, we're now in 2021—how many of those billion trees have been planted? We're talking about plantation timber. That's what Australians support and what the industry wants: plantation timber. How many trees have been planted to help us with the building construction boom that is going on? Bipartisanship is possible when you actually do something, but you cannot demand Labor sign up to bipartisanship when you do nothing, which is what is we have seen from this government, particularly when it comes to the timber shortage. What's frustrating is the industry has been warning about the shortage for the good part of a decade, and this government have been here for eight years now but have failed to meet the demands of the industry. In my part of the world, the Bendigo electorate, Woodend in the south, which will become part of McEwen electorate at the next election, is still a timber town. It still is home to timber plantations. They have been supplying the Australian industry for many years. But, like all parts of the urban growth corridor, they are constantly under pressure: will this area be the next area to be developed? I note one of the earlier speakers from the government side is from the area of the Sunshine Coast. Today, when you drive from Maroochydore to Brisbane, more and more of that land, which used to be covered in plantation timber, is being developed for housing. Whilst we welcome development, where are the new trees being planted to keep our supply sustainable going forward? This is a crop, a product, that takes time to grow. It's basic maths: if you don't plant the trees now—or five years ago, when you first said you would—we will run into a shortage. The government, because of its short-sighted politics, has created of its own doing the crisis we're experiencing today. They ignored the calls years ago to put the trees into the ground and then they introduced policies to speed up construction, which has created the bottleneck that we are experiencing now in the industry and the exorbitant prices that people are now paying. The COVID pandemic was already going to cause an explosion in demand for building products, and that's what we're experiencing. Globally, as has been highlighted, there is a shortage of timber as people have moved towards using this sustainable material. There are policies that are being put in place by governments and local authorities all over the world that preference timber as opposed to other carbon based building products. We've seen that, for example, in California and throughout Europe, so we knew that there would be a supply shortage, which was exacerbated by COVID as more and more Australians stayed home, looked to renovate their homes and looked to build. Then the government introduced the HomeBuilder program, which sped up residential construction and led to greater demand. The industry is now saying that there are delays of six to 12 months. Prices have gone through the roof. Due to its short-sightedness, the government did not ensure that we would have the building supplies needed to deliver the HomeBuilder program. It is crazy that the government is still stalling in this area, which is why I welcome the motion that's been put forward by the member for Eden-Monaro. Whether you're a builder in a regional town like Bendigo, whether you're a supplier like Hume & Iser in my part of the world or whether you're one of the many other hardware stores around Australia, you know this issue is real. Whether you're a renovator or whether you're somebody trying to get the work done yourself, you know we have a timber shortage. The government needs to act. We need national leadership to make sure that this timber shortage isn't prolonged over the next few decades. We've got to get the trees into the ground. We've got to get the policy right to do so. But, in answers to Senate estimates, the government revealed that they're nowhere near on track to meeting the goals that they set. 11:25 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor I thank the member for Eden-Monaro for bringing this motion forward, because it gives me, as a Western Australian who represents timber communities, an opportunity to discuss some of the WA Labor government's policies relating to timber. But I'll come back to that. I first want to address the motion as brought forward by the member for Eden-Monaro. Yes, Australia is experiencing a shortage in timber products. In some respects, we're a victim of our own success. Certainly the HomeBuilder program has turbocharged the construction industry. As speakers before me mentioned, in July and August of last year the construction industry in Australia was facing a cliff. Applications for homes had dropped off that cliff, and they were looking down the barrel of some seriously hard economic conditions. The construction industry across this nation employs over a million people. The government took swift and decisive action, and I want to commend the Assistant Treasurer, Michael Sukkar, for his policy initiative in this space. Across my electorate in some of the smaller regional towns we've seen an explosion in housing approvals. Blocks of land that had been sitting idle for up to 10 years with no offers have all been snapped up, and that has turbocharged the regional economy. But let's get the facts straight here: this timber shortage is a worldwide phenomenon at the moment. A particular beetle in eastern Europe devastated the plantation estates in Europe. Much more of the product is ending up in wood pellets to power electricity generation plants across Europe. So we are seeing high demand at a time when production is dropping off. As previous speakers mentioned, this is a 30-year investment. A forestry plantation takes 30 years to grow. We can look back 30 years to see what the policy settings were then, and it's interesting to note that there was a Labor government in power at the time. But let's not look at the past; let's look to the future. As my colleague the member for Barker pointed out, the federal government is investing an enormous amount of money in the forestry industry going forward. We've committed almost $20 million to establish 11 regional forestry hubs around the country. One of those hubs is partially situated in my electorate, and it's already giving confidence and kicking goals in terms of forestry industry investment in that part of the world. We've delivered almost $80 million in funding recovery and resilience activities following the bushfires, and I'm sure that much of the $80 million ended up in the member for Eden-Monaro's electorate. We've also delivered $6 million in funding for new and existing National Institute for Forest Products Innovation centres. At this stage, they're situated in Gippsland, in Mount Gambier and in Launceston. These centres are delivering targeted regional research and development activities, which we know are key to developing the forestry industry. In the time I have left, I want to come to the Western Australian situation. What has happened to our native forest industry in WA is quite alarming. As we know, a long-term investment such as forestry needs confidence. It needs confidence that government are going to back them and it needs confidence that government are going to keep to their word. In terms of the impact across Western Australia—and much of this is in my electorate of O'Connor—the native forestry sector directly employs over 500 people and contributes $220 million to the WA economy each year. In addition to those directly employed people, the industry underpins many small businesses across towns like Nannup, Manjimup, Bridgetown and many more across my electorate. Ninety per cent of the jobs in the figure that I quoted are based in those regional communities. How did this come about? How did we arrive at this situation? In 2020, the state government and the minister responsible—Minister for Forestry Dave Kelly—made the statement in relation to Parkside, which invested $50 million in processing facilities: Parkside has come to Western Australia and made significant investments because it had confidence that this government supports the ongoing native forest industry. For the member to say that we are undermining confidence is simply not true. And what did Minister Dave Kelly announce on 9 September 2021? That they were pulling the rug out from under the native logging industry and closing it down in 2024. It's an absolute disgrace. (Time expired) 11:30 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Roof truss suppliers across my region are declaring Australia's severe timber shortage a national crisis that is having significant knock-on effects not only for the building industry but also for jobs and the economy, and it's not going to end any time soon, according to one of the nation's leading prefab manufacturers, Timbertruss, which is based in my region in Geelong. Business manager Steve Collier said the shortage will have long-lasting implications for the cost of housing and jobs in the industry. Steve says timber from overseas is costing between 85 per cent to 125 per cent more and this is inevitably being passed on to the client, leading to a concerning increase in the cost of housing. The flow-on impacts for apprentices, local carpenters, electricians, roofers and plumbers and the related retail sector are being badly felt. 'It's crushing for builders,' he said. 'I feel particularly for the smaller construction firms and family building businesses who can't even get a quote for a job.' Ultimately, this means building jobs are being pushed back by about three months on average. What is the Morrison-Joyce government doing about this? Very little, it appears. Not only has the Morrison-Joyce government failed to anticipate and develop a plan to manage the nation's timber shortage; it has contributed to the crisis. The government's lack of a substantive policy, combined with its failure to act on its own tree-planting targets, has once again shown that the government is incapable of real vision, planning and implementation. It's not like the government wasn't warned of this crisis. Back in late June, CFMMEU National Secretary Michael O'Connor wrote to housing minister Michael Sukkar, the then industry minister Christian Porter and Assistant Minister for Industry Development, Jonathon Duniam, requesting an urgent meeting to discuss support for the forestry sector. Now, more than six months into the crisis, there's still no coherent plan from the Morrison-Joyce government. Victoria's Master Builders Association CEO Rebecca Casson said builders are being so badly squeezed that it's sending some broke. It's law that builders who have entered into contracts must absorb the cost of delays, such as with timber shortages. It's true Australia is caught up in a worldwide shortage of timber. The US is paying up to 400 per cent higher than normal for timber, and the devastating 2019-20 Black Summer bushfires have also contributed to the current shortage. However, Australia might not have been in such a dire position had the government had its eye on the ball. In normal circumstances, only about 20 per cent of Australia's construction timber is imported, so this crisis is more about domestic management than international supply issues. More homes than ever are being built around this nation—some figures suggest 20 per cent more in 2020-21 than in any previous year. The current building surge has been spurred on by various factors, some very much within the government's direct control, such as the government's own HomeBuilder program, for instance, which has seen 135,000 applications. The program is placing additional pressure on limited supplies and driving up prices. However, fixing the building timber supply issues needs a longer-term solution. A recent joint report from Master Builders Australia and the Australian Forest Products Association says Australia's timber shortage will escalate. By 2035, the nation will be short 250,000 house frames. That's the equivalent of the housing stock in the cities of greater Geelong and Newcastle combined. An urgent national plan is needed to address the timber shortage. But what the Morrison government has provided so far is a policy vacuum. In the short term, to alleviate the current problem, there must be support for sawmills. In the longer term, we must ensure there is timber plantation stock to meet future housing demand. Currently, there are only 2,750 hectares of new plantations of softwood nationally, yet we need 400,000 new hectares of plantations by 2030 just to meet future demand. The Morrison-Joyce government promised to meet a $1 billion plantation trees target in 2018, but, as usual, Mr Morrison has failed to do anything. Importantly, we must not let the government's failure be used to justify increased logging of our national native forests. The construction industry is the key to economic growth. Construction in my region of high growth is so important. The Morrison-Joyce government has failed the timber industry. It has failed the construction industry. It has failed local builders and apprentices and the housing consumers. They must do better. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Australian Security Intelligence Organisation 136 11:36 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra I move: That this House: (1) recognises the critical work of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) in safeguarding Australia's security and national interests; (2) notes that ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess recently observed that 'Australia's threat environment is complex, challenging and changing'; (3) commends the Government for providing $1.3 billion over ten years in the 2021-22 Budget to help further improve ASIO's capabilities; and (4) thanks the men and women who work in ASIO and our other national security agencies for their dedication to keeping Australians safe from a range of threats and to protecting our national sovereignty. Many Australians don't appreciate what ASIO does to protect our freedom and our democracy by keeping terrorism, foreign interference and espionage at bay. That's because much of its important work, rightly, is invisible to the community. ASIO protects Australians from religiously motivated and ideologically motivated violence. It does this by collecting intelligence, analysing and investigating terrorism threats, and providing advice to and working with partners to strengthen public safety and to intervene to disrupt attacks. Right now, ASIO is aware of multiple threats to Australia and several extremists who want to harm Australians. Australia's terrorism threat level remains at 'probable'. The changing nature of terrorism and violent extremism presents challenges for the early identification and detection of threats by ASIO. The threat of religiously motivated extremism from Sunni violent extremist groups persists, with the violent narrative espoused by terrorists groups such as ISIL and al-Qaeda continuing to inspire attacks here and overseas. However, people motivated by other forms of violent extremism, including ideologically motivated extremism and, specifically, nationalist or racist violent extremism, are also increasingly present in Australia. This now accounts for around 50 per cent of ASIO's current terrorism case load. Investigations into ideological extremists have occurred in all Australian states and territories. The Director-General of Security, Mike Burgess, has said that this unprecedented shift in the national security threat to ideologically motivated extremism is being fuelled by disinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and other global events. He said: In suburbs around Australia, small cells regularly meet to salute Nazi flags, inspect weapons, train in combat and share their hateful ideology. For me, one of the most concerning aspects of their investigations is the growing number of young people, in particular young men, who are being radicalised by these ideologies. ASIO has identified people under the age of 18 involved in violent extremism, and has warned that minors had not only conducted terrorist attacks but had held leadership positions in terrorist organisations. In its annual report released last week, ASIO said: Violent extremist narratives … particularly appeal to teenagers, and may resonate with some minors' feelings of alienation, unease about the future and mistrust of adults. This should be of concern to all of us. In his 2020-21 annual threat assessment report, the Director-General of Security said: The extremists are security conscious and adapt their security posture to avoid attention. In their online forums and chat rooms, they show that they're savvy when it comes to operating at the limits of what is legal and discuss ways to 'beat the system' in what they say and do. ASIO anticipates that the threat from this form of extremism will not diminish anytime soon—and may well grow. Any terrorism attack on home soil is more likely to be committed by a lone actor or a small group using simple methods and basic weapons such as knives, guns and vehicles. The threat of espionage and foreign interference is at the highest it has ever been—higher even than during the Cold War. Espionage and foreign interference involves foreign actors, including state actors, trying to steal our secrets and interfere with and ultimately undermine our democracy. ASIO has responded to these threats with targeted investigations and campaigns that have meaningfully reduced harm. Working with their partners, their activities led to law enforcement outcomes and intelligence-led disruptions. Visas have been cancelled and spy networks dismantled. These activities have led to significant reductions in the number of foreign spies and their proxies operating here in Australia. But ASIO remains concerned about the potential for Australia's adversaries to pre-position malicious code in critical infrastructure, particularly in areas such as telecommunications and energy. In this year's budget the government is giving ASIO unprecedented capacity to do what is required to protect our people and our national interest—$1.3 billion over 10 years. The additional investment will help ASIO to continue to out-imagine and outmanoeuvre sophisticated foreign adversaries and detect and disrupt violent extremists. It will significantly enhance ASIO's ability to identify and respond to threats posed by more-sophisticated groups, whether driven by religious or ideological motivations, or foreign interference. ASIO needs to keep up with technological developments and stay ahead of our adversaries; 97 per cent of priority counterterrorism investigations are being slowed down by ASIO's difficulty in excessing encrypted messaging. This is a serious challenge, especially when the Director-General reminds us that more data was created in the last two years than in the entire remaining human history. ASIO continues to adapt their counterterrorism efforts to respond to the changing security environment. As a member of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, I think I speak for all members of the committee when I say that we universally appreciate the candour, professionalism and independence of Mike Burgess, the Director-General of Security. I'd like to thank all the officers of ASIO for all they do to keep Australia and Australians safe. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP Is the motion seconded? Mr Josh Wilson 265970 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 11:41 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand I thank the member for Berowra for moving this important motion regarding the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, and I'm pleased to rise to support it, because the men and women of ASIO—indeed, across all our intelligence and security services—do incredibly important work to keep us safe and to secure the things we value as a nation. As ASIO's 2020-21 annual report, recently tabled in parliament, highlights, the threat environment we're dealing with is quite complex, challenging and changing. It's one of those threats in particular that I want to highlight today: the threat of cyber-enabled foreign interference. Foreign interference is a real and significant threat to Australia's national sovereignty. ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess has been warning for some time about the increased scale and sophistication of espionage and foreign interference in our society. He's described them, appropriately I think, as threats to our way of life. Indeed, ASIO's annual report warns: Based on current trends, we anticipate that espionage and foreign interference will supplant terrorism as Australia's principal security concern over the next five years. It went on to say: … espionage and foreign interference attempts by multiple countries remain unacceptably high. These attempts occur on a daily basis. They are sophisticated and wide-ranging. They are enabled and accelerated by technology. Labor shares the concerns of ASIO about the risk of cyber-enabled foreign interference. That's why we successfully moved to establish a select committee looking into it, chaired by my colleague Senator McAllister in the other place. With the threat of cyber-enabled foreign interference growing at such a rapid clip, we cannot be complacent and reactive in our approach to countering it. Effectively countering this threat requires that the government and our agencies be proactive, particularly when it comes to groups that are frequent targets of foreign interference but lack the institutional protections afforded to government and other critical infrastructure. Given the continued public warnings from the highest levels of ASIO and the multiple instances of cyber-enabled foreign interference, this shouldn't still need to be said. In the past we've seen multiple cyberattacks on the university sector for the purposes of espionage and foreign interference. We've seen cyber-enabled campaigns of targeted harassment against journalists, human rights actors and members of diaspora communities in our society. One recent example that I want to draw the House's attention to is the Pegasus malware campaign recently revealed by the Guardian. Pegasus is a type of malware software developed by Israeli technology firm NSO Group. Once the system is infected, the malware allows the person operating it to extract messages, photos and emails; to record calls; and to secretly activate the microphones of a target's mobile phone. This software is sold by NSO Group to governments around the world, some of whom, it's been revealed in the past, are authoritarian regimes. It's been reported that Pegasus was used to track down close associates of murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The Guardian has claimed that a leaked data set of more than 50,000 phone numbers, obtained by Amnesty International, was a list of Pegasus targets and alleges that amongst the targets were politicians, journalists and activists. Unfortunately, Australians looking for information from the government or our intelligence services on how to find out whether they have been targeted by this malware have been left wanting. Some enterprising security researchers at Citizen Lab, out of the University of Toronto, developed a tool to enable individuals to check their devices for signs of compromise. Australians, particularly those most at risk, who have been targeted by cyber-enabled foreign interference, like members of our diaspora communities, journalists and think-tank members, could have benefited from a similar tool being made available by our security agencies for their use. It raises the question of why we aren't doing more to proactively identify opportunities to help at-risk members of diaspora communities targeted by authoritarian countries to protect themselves through strategic and scalable interventions of this kind. This should be a real focus for government and our security and intelligence agencies. Unfortunately, it seems that the Morrison government loves to use 'cyber-enabled foreign interference' as a buzzword at media conferences but hasn't yet shown the commitment to following through on protecting members of diaspora communities in the Australian general public from authoritarian countries. In the shadow of a federal election, this should become an even more urgent priority. ASPI has identified dozens of elections that have been interfered with through cyber-enabled foreign interference in recent years. When asked by the Select Committee on Foreign Interference through Social Media who was responsible for responding to foreign interference during an election, the government's answer was: half a dozen entities within government but no single entity with lead responsibility. This is something that must be addressed as a matter of priority. The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security has recently recommended that the government put in place a process during the caretaker period for an apolitical disclosure of cyber-enabled foreign interference. It has also highlighted the need to update caretaker provisions to provide classified briefings to the opposition during the caretaker period. If the government is serious about tackling cyber-enabled foreign interference, then implementing these recommendations is the least it can do. More broadly, it needs to give priority to proactively tackling this treat. (Time expired) 11:46 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I, too, recognise the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, ASIO, for the critical role it plays in protecting Australia and all Australians from threats to their security. ASIO works tirelessly to protect Australians from politically motivated and communal violence through collecting intelligence, analysing and investigating terrorism threats, and providing advice to and working with partners to strengthen public safety and intervene to disrupt terrorist attacks. The need for ASIO, and the government's support for ASIO, has never been stronger given Australia's terrorism threat level has remained at 'probable' since it was declared that in 2014. ASIO's director-general, Mike Burgess, stated to Senate estimates in May this year: Australia's threat environment is complex, challenging and changing. In terms of threat to life, terrorism threat level remains at probable and unfortunately will do so for the foreseeable future. Right now ASIO is aware of multiple religiously motivated violent extremists who want to kill Australians. He also noted: At the same time our investigations in ideologically motivated violent extremism such as racists and nationalists are approaching 50 per cent of our priority counterterrorism onshore caseload. The director-general's words should serve as a disturbing yet important reminder that Australia's national security should never be met with complacency and that action must be taken to support ASIO and our other national security agencies in their everyday efforts to protect Australia against people and organisations that seek to bring violence, chaos and disruption upon us. That is why the Morrison government is committed to supporting ASIO in its efforts to protect the country and the Australian people. As announced in the budget, the government is giving ASIO unprecedented capability uplift by investing $1.3 billion over the next 10 years. This substantial commitment will allow ASIO to sustain its operations, enhance its capabilities to operate in a more complex threat environment, and respond to challenges posed by rapid technological change. Part of that money, which I particularly want to focus on, is the commitment of $945 million for current operations, building capability and the Enterprise Transformation Program. This funding will significantly enhance ASIO's ability to identify and respond to threats posed by more and more sophisticated threat actors, whether motivated by violent extremism or attempts at espionage and foreign interference. There's a long list of measures that this funding will support, but, just to name a few, the funding will enable ASIO to keep up with the latest technology that Australia's adversaries are using to undermine our national security. It will allow ASIO to defeat encryption based methods of communication, which are currently being exploited by terrorists and spies in an effort to conceal their plans to commit attacks on Australian soil. The investment will also allow ASIO to extract critical intelligence from large and complex data sets to connect the dots between that information, and more reliably identify potential threat indicators. It will accelerate ASIO's operational responses. And it will enable ASIO to promptly deliver detailed advice to government, industry and other stakeholders to ensure security threats are taken care of as soon as they are identified. At the core of the Morrison government there has always been a robust, unmatched commitment to ensuring the protection of all Australians. Through this unprecedented investment in ASIO over the next decade, the government is ensuring that ASIO will continue to evolve so that it can to out-imagine and outmanoeuvre sophisticated foreign adversaries, detect and disrupt violent extremists, and ultimately protect the Australian people. I also note that the government continues to ensure that the exercise of these powers by our security agencies is subject to strong and uncompromising oversight, including through the Inspector-General, the INSLM and the PJCIS. Finally, I would like to take this time to thank the many dedicated men and women who work in ASIO for the important work they do each day to protect their country and fellow Australians. Working for ASIO, much like our other national security agencies, takes a huge amount of sacrifice and commitment. Without their continued dedication, the many freedoms we enjoy on a daily basis and the incredible way of life we have in this country simply wouldn't exist. 11:51 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay Australia's threat environment is complex, challenging and changing. The member for Berowra notes these comments from the Director-General of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, Mike Burgess, in ASIO's annual report tabled last week, 'It is of vital importance that we have an honest conversation with the Australian people about the challenges facing Australia from malicious actors who would seek to undermine our democratic institutions and threaten our way of life.' In response to the rapid deterioration of our strategic landscape, and the increasingly frequent and complex threats we face, the Morrison government has embarked on a series of landmark investments, initiatives and partnerships to enhance our national security and protect our national interests. One area of extreme concern is espionage and foreign interference, which ASIO states is 'poised to become Australia's principal security concern over the next five years'. ASIO has identified sophisticated and wideranging espionage and foreign interference attempts occurring on a daily basis. The threat is higher now than during the Cold War. The Morrison government is giving ASIO an unprecedented capability uplift to address this, by enhancing operational ability to counter these complex threats and respond to rapid technological change. One particular area enduring sustained, concentrated threats is our critical infrastructure. Our energy, telecommunications, health care, banking, food and water all exist in the increasing spectrum of grey-zone targets in the current environment. That's why the Morrison government is introducing new legislation to urgently protect Australia's critical infrastructure from cyber infiltration and attack. We're investing $1.25 billion over 10 years to enhance ASIO's ability to connect the dots through a human-led data-driven technology-enabled approach to threat detection. We are empowering our national security agencies—including ASIO, the Australian Signals Directorate, Australian Secret Intelligence Service, Australian Federal Police and more—to deter and respond to the complex, challenging and changing threats Australia is facing today. This is not unique to Australia's critical infrastructure. In the Indo-Pacific, we see rapid military modernisation, increased foreign interference, cyberthreats, the proliferation of disinformation and overt economic coercion. These wide-ranging strategic challenges require wide-ranging strategic responses. We are exercising multiple layers to strengthen our national security to keep Australians safe. The Morrison government is further enhancing our ability to shape our environment, deter actions against our interests and, if required, respond with force by enhancing our relationships with trusted, like-minded partners. The establishment of a new trilateral security partnership with the United Kingdom and the United States, AUKUS, and the elevation of the Quad with India, Japan and the United States are testament to this. As the chair of the Australia-United States Parliamentary Friendship Group, I welcome this momentous step towards the interoperability between our great friend and ally at a bilateral level and within these significant multilateral partnerships. As the Prime Minister said in the first in-person meeting of Quad leaders in Washington DC: We stand here, together, in the Indo-Pacific region, a region that we wish to be always be free from coercion, where the sovereign rights of all nations are respected and where disputes are settled peacefully and [in]accordance with international law. Australia stands up for our values, especially in the face of adversity. We have shown this through the pandemic. From the beginning, Australia showed leadership leading the call on the international stage for an independent inquiry into the origins of COVID-19 that has wreaked havoc around the world, decimating lives and livelihoods. Australians have stood up each and every day, keeping each other safe and demonstrating our resilience as a nation. Former US ambassador to Australia, Arthur B Culvahouse Jr, recently applauded Australia for standing up for its sovereign right to protect the integrity of its communications, political processes and government deliberations in the face of what Ambassador Culvahouse calls 'unabashed economic coercion from the Chinese Communist Party'. I worked closely with Ambassador Culvahouse during his tenure through my role as chair of the Australia-United States Parliamentary Friendship Group, and I agree with his assessment of Australia's resilience. 11:56 The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Centrelink 140 11:57 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I move: That this House: (1) acknowledges that: (a) Australia's social security system is a proud Labor legacy; (b) social security payments provide economic stability, fostering smooth transitions during times of economic uncertainty; and (c) Centrelink has provided critical support to many Australians over the course of the pandemic; (2) recognises that: (a) the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic serves as a reminder for all governments about the importance of robust local public services; (b) there are many people who do not have internet and rely on local Centrelink branch access to conduct their Centrelink business; (c) the closure of face-to-face Centrelink services will force many vulnerable Australians, carers, people with disability and students to travel excessive lengths to access the services they need; (d) many people who rely upon Centrelink services live well below the poverty line and have zero capacity to pay more for travel or parking; and (e) the Government's secret plan to close or reduce access to Centrelink shopfronts across Australia is unconscionable; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) terminate any plans to consolidate, close or reduce access to the Mornington, Newcastle, Tweed Heads, Yarra and Abbotsford Centrelink offices once and for all; (b) cease the impending closure of the face-to-face Centrelink service in Braddon; and (c) reinstate all Centrelink shopfronts which have been closed in the last two years, including the services located in Benalla and Newport, Victoria. I'm very pleased to move this motion today. I'm grateful to the member for Canberra, who has agreed to second it, because her community, like mine, is facing the brutal reality of this Morrison Liberal government's decision to close or reduce access to Centrelink offices. But the member for Canberra's local Centrelink office is not the only office under threat from being merged or shutdown altogether. From Mornington and Newport in Victoria to Tweed Heads and the city of Newcastle in New South Wales, local communities have been left in a state of anxiety and uncertainty, unsure if their local Centrelink office is even going to be there when they need it. Year on year, this Liberal government has set out to starve Centrelink of resources and curb its ability to deliver essential support for Australians. Not content with its history of cuts and underresourcing, the Morrison government's now turning its attention to shutting down Centrelink's physical presence in our communities, the very offices that people need to go to when they need assistance and support. Two years ago, the former Minister for Government Services made it clear that his government was planning to close King Street and Mayfield Centrelink offices in Newcastle. Indeed, we later found out that the government's actually planning to end five, not just two, public service tenancies in my electorate, and they intend to consolidate these five offices into one single CBD building. The proposed closures of the King Street and Mayfield Centrelink offices was never an isolated decision. It was, instead, part of a very devious and coordinated plan to drastically shrink Centrelink's frontline footprint. True to form, the Morrison government hasn't been honest with the public about these plans. There has been zero consultation with my community, leaving jobseekers, people with disability, their carers, pensioners and families completely in the dark now for over two years. Every time the minister is asked for more details of these reckless plans, the government hides behind the guise of commercial-in-confidence. The people relying on Centrelink tell me how much it means to them to be able to talk face to face with another human in times of crisis. My constituents want to be able to attend their Centrelink shopfront in person to access the support they need when they need it. This is not an unreasonable request. How dare this government set about axing critical frontline services in Newcastle with such little regard for the consequences! How dare they treat Novocastrians with such contempt! And how dare they think they can get away with this appalling plan! The Morrison Liberal government's relentless push to close Centrelink shopfronts across Australia is just another step in a long line of attempts to undermine Australia's social security safety net. For years, the Liberal government has refused to increase Newstart or even acknowledge that it was shockingly inadequate to begin with. We haven't forgotten the four long, anxious and fearful years where this Liberal government pursued hundreds of thousands of innocent Australians with false or inflated social security debts as part of its now-infamous robodebt scheme. Yet this government hasn't learnt a thing. They remain fiercely committed to forcing Australians—some in their 50s and 60s who've worked all their lives but have found themselves redundant—to now undergo drug tests, by urinating in a cup, as a condition of receiving support. They've foreshadowed a national rollout of compulsory income management, seeking to punish and humiliate Australians in need of support. It's a cruel and callous plan that will prevent pensioners—those on an age pension or a disability support pension, or even carers—from being able to use their cash to buy cheaper foods from local markets or stores, buy second-hand furniture, give some money to their grandkids or go and have an occasional meal with friends and family at the local club. Over the past decade, the Liberal Party's strategy on social security has been to just make it so impossibly cruel to navigate that people just give up and walk away, destined to be trapped in poverty. Seriously—what kind of government even contemplates ripping away the social safety net from its people as they struggle to recover from a global pandemic? The notion of closing Centrelink offices as demand skyrockets is both cruel and foolish. With unemployment rising in the last month and the global pandemic far from over, it is unbelievable that the Morrison government would close the King Street and Mayfield Centrelink offices. This government has demonstrated nothing but contempt for the tens of thousands of Australians who will feel the detrimental impact of their plans. Let me be very clear, Prime Minister: Newcastle says no to this terrible plan. We say no to starving Centrelink of the resources it needs to properly support Novocastrians in our times of need. And I am calling on you, Prime Minister, to assure the people of Newcastle that you will ditch this reckless and callous plan to consolidate, reduce or close access to our Centrelink offices once and for all. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP Is the motion seconded? Ms Payne 144732 I second the motion. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZP I thank the member for Canberra. The motion is seconded. The question before the chair is that the motion be agreed to. 12:02 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff I don't really wish to get into a tit-for-tat argument with those opposite about which political party can claim the legacy of social security in our country— A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 12:03 to 12:19 Ms BELL 282981 I know that Australians don't really want or need a history lesson from those opposite; they want the planning and they want the action that this government—the Morrison government—has delivered throughout these most uncertain times. The truth, of course, is that Australia's social security system has served us very well. Prior to this crisis we saw the proportion of working-age Australians who were reliant on payments down to its lowest level in more than 30 years, at 13.5 per cent. But what I will say as a preamble to my contribution on this motion is that it was in fact under Menzies that the first child endowment payment was delivered, in 1941. It saw the establishment of a national government-provided social security system. Unemployment, sickness benefits, and the widow's pensions by Labor governments all followed that. When coronavirus hit, Moncrieff had about 5,900 individuals on Centrelink payments. The number very quickly went up to over 15,000 individuals, who had enhanced social security through the coronavirus supplement payment at that time. It was a life-saver for so many in the community. Of course, it was the combination of the JobSeeker coronavirus supplement and JobKeeper 1 and 2 that kept the doors open for over 10,000 small businesses on the central Gold Coast—that is, one-third of all small businesses in my electorate—which in turn helped thousands of families to get through those tough early days of the pandemic. Australia, indeed, has one of the best, if not the best, safety nets for our citizens, better than in any other country around the world. That has been highlighted during the last 19 or so months of the global pandemic, with the provision of two million working-age payments, including the JobSeeker payment, the parenting payment and the student payment, to recipients. Twenty billion dollars, or $9,400 per recipient, was paid to enhance the social security net for those Australians who needed it. In addition, we've delivered the largest increase to unemployment benefits since 1986. Since 1 April 2021, the Morrison government has permanently increased the rate of working-age payments, including the JobSeeker payment, youth allowance and the parenting payment, by $50 a fortnight. That's in addition to the usual indexation of payments that occurred in March 2021 and September 2021. This increase comes at a cost to the Australian taxpayer of $9.5 billion, and we must respect that these payments are as a result of taxes coming from those who work to support those who do not or cannot. Throughout the pandemic, at its height, we've provided $32 billion in emergency support payments. On top of that, we've made four economic support payments, totalling $2,000, to around 5.1 million age pensioners and disability pensioners—including my dear old dad, I might say—carer payment recipients, family payment recipients and veterans payment recipients over the course of 2021. This came at a cost to the taxpayer of over $12 billion. The government has also put in place a range of supports to ensure all Australians have a safety net to get them through the lockdowns, be it through the disaster payment, the pandemic leave payment or the income support payments provided to Australians on a regular and ongoing basis. In addition, there is support through the crisis payment for national health emergency for those who are required to self-isolate, or care for someone who is required to self-isolate, because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The history books will show that no government in the last 30 years—not Rudd, not Gillard, not Keating—has done more for Australians doing it tough than the Morrison government has. In terms of what members opposite are saying about the diminishing number of shopfronts, there are 319 customer-facing sites delivering services to the Australian community. Services Australia operates 398 commercial properties in every state and territory in the country. There is increased uptake of online services via myGov and the Express Plus mobile app. Over the past six years there has been a 43 per cent decrease in customers visiting service centres. In my mind, if I were a customer of Centrelink, I would like to be able to access Centrelink payments in a number of ways. Some of them are via a shopfront, some of them are digital, and that is enhancing our modern nation. (Time expired) 12:23 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra I rise in support of the motion moved by the member for Newcastle. I thank her for moving this important motion, which highlights the importance of our social security system, something that we as a nation should take more pride in. We do take pride in the fact that we have universal health care and a strong public education system, but it is the social safety net, along with decent wages, that keeps Australians out of poverty and should enable all Australians to live with dignity and have opportunity. It should be what makes our society one where we support each other when we need it. But the government are ideologically opposed to the social safety net. They have neglected it and have focused on cutting and demonising it and everyone who accesses it. This motion focuses on Centrelink, vital to delivering these services, and their attacks extend to this too. We are seeing Centrelinks being closed around the country, including the Braddon Centrelink in my electorate, the only Centrelink in my electorate, the only Centrelink in central Canberra. The pandemic has shown us just how essential social security and the Centrelink shopfronts that deliver it really are. Around the nation, we've seen something like the Great Depression: long lines of people stretching out the doors of Centrelink shopfronts, as workers found their lives turned upside down and their jobs gone when the pandemic hit. We saw the power of social security payments to keep people out of poverty at a time when we were in recession and to enable people to stay home and keep us safe from the spread of COVID. The social safety net literally saved lives. JobKeeper and the coronavirus supplement ensured that people who lost work didn't sink into poverty and people who were looking for work were given a lifeline. Research by the Australian National University confirms that the extra $550 per fortnight lifted hundreds of thousands of Australians out of poverty. The government could have kept this supplement and ensured that people were kept out of poverty at least until the end of the pandemic. But they reduced it and then removed it completely, and hundreds of thousands of Australians were pushed back into poverty. What this shows, apart from this government's penchant for cruelty, is that poverty is a public policy choice. It was a choice of this government to put people first and improve the lives of millions of Australians and it was a choice of Australians to push them straight back down. It's not just the payments it has taken away. As I said, Centrelinks are closing around the country. The Braddon shopfront in central Canberra is used by thousands in the inner north and inner south of Canberra. It's conveniently located and the well trained staff are known for their professionalism, empathy and ability to help, exactly the opposite of this government's approach to social security recipients. Earlier this year I found out by a Facebook post that the office space was being advertised, which meant that the government was looking at closing this Centrelink shopfront. I started a petition that almost 1½ thousand Canberrans have signed. Despite this huge community support for the service to remain open and zero community consultation about the closure, the minister wrote to me earlier this month to confirm that the government will axe this crucial shopfront in December, right before Christmas, and won't be opening a replacement anywhere in central Canberra. What does the minister say to pensioners, people with disability, jobseekers, students, parents, people experiencing homelessness and people escaping domestic violence who rely on this shopfront? What do they say to those struggling to survive on the disgracefully low JobSeeker payment of $43 per day, who will now have to spend a significant portion of their weekly income on public transport to go to Gungahlin or Woden to access a Centrelink shopfront? (Quorum formed) Not everyone can use online services, not everyone has a computer or a smartphone, not everyone even has an address. Canberrans have told me how important this Centrelink is to them. Lorenzo is a student at the ANU who lives in the inner north. He became ill last year and had to cease full-time study. He went into Braddon to get help to sort out his payments and ended up being entitled to $1,000 in back pay. His was an issue that couldn't be sorted out over the phone. There were no forms to fill out and the online portal didn't have the answers. People like Lorenzo need a service centre close by. Canberrans are not going to stand by and watch the government close the only Centrelink in my electorate. It is not good enough from this government, who knows nothing other than to demonise and attack our social security system and the important services that it delivers. We will fight to save our Centrelink in the inner north of Canberra. 12:30 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson I'm proud to speak in support of this motion moved by my colleague the member for Newcastle. Australia's social security system is indeed a proud Labor legacy, and it is one that we will continue to support, protect, strengthen and defend. A lease sign in the window of Kurri Kurri Centrelink caused immediate concern in my community in February 2019. I made representations to the minister and to the Department of Social Services, and the doors remain open. It seems to have been a leasing issue. But we're watching. The people of Kurri need a Centrelink office as much as all the other townships that have them across Australia. As we have seen, particularly in times of health and economic uncertainty, social security payments provide essential economic stability for families. They are a vital safety net. Currently, two million Australians are looking for work or looking for more work. Over 300,000 more Australians are relying on unemployment payments of some nature compared to before this terrible pandemic. Centrelink has provided critical support over the course of COVID-19 for these and other people who need help. My office, which is situated right next door to a Centrelink office—so we see it firsthand, day in, day out—has been inundated with people trying to find out what help they can get, what new payments are available and how to go about navigating the system, the dreaded system, to get help, because the system is complex and very confusing. The rules are complex and confusing. I have fantastic professional staff who deal with this constantly, and even they talk about how much more complex and confusing it has been under this government. Sometimes, in the case of the COVID pandemic, the doors to some Centrelink offices have closed, and the phone lines have incredible waiting times. I remember with disdain the day that Minister Robert stood up in the House of Representatives and said, 'Just give Centrelink a tingle.' Who gives Centrelink a tingle? Seriously! It can take a portion of your life away. As other speakers today have said, face-to-face Centrelink services are absolutely vital for so many members of our communities, and keeping the doors open in Centrelink offices throughout Australia is now more important than ever. Today I want to focus on one other aspect of the social security system that is front and centre in the minds of many members of my community in the electorate of Paterson, and that's the age pension. Although not a grand amount, the age pension is a vital payment for senior members of our community, for those who've worked all their lives, paid their taxes and made valuable contributions in many other ways too. The age pension is there to ensure that in retirement you are comfortable and have some dignity. Labor values age pensioners. We're on your side if you're on the pension. Unlike those opposite, we don't want to see you struggle. We want to ensure that age pensioners are able to access payments that are their right and that they have the right to spend that money the way they see fit. But this government wants to curtail the capacity of age pensioners to live life as they choose and spend their money as they wish. It wants to put them all on a cashless welfare card and control 80 per cent of their spending. What an offensive idea—that someone who's reached that stage in life can't figure out how they want to spend their own money! Labor will fight this cashless welfare card hammer and tongs, with all our might. Indeed, my colleague the member for Bruce will bring a bill to parliament to try and stamp it out once and for all. Whenever this issue is raised, those on the other side say: 'This is just another Labor scare campaign.' It is not. Our communities know it's not. The Morrison government has previously introduced legislation to make it possible, and, right at this moment, the government is inviting community organisations to apply for grants to become cashless debit card support services. That's right. Under the Strong and Resilient Communities program, the government is offering grants to support widespread rollouts of the cashless welfare debit card. It is happening, and we will not let it be so. 12:35 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley I'm pleased to support this motion which covers one of the most vital safety nets we have in this country in our social services. One of the things that really sets Australia apart from so many countries around the world is the fact that we do not leave the most vulnerable people in our community to languish on their own. It's the fact that, as a community and as governments, we understand there is an obligation to people who are in a time of need or suffering from some affliction that means that they can't work or can't access support through family or friends, so that they can turn to their government for help. Of course, we're in modern times now and that help can be accessed in many ways, and there's no doubt that online services have made life so much easier for so many people across the community. But we know that telling someone to get online and get to a myGov account and somehow work out how to access their disability support pension, their age pension or their single parent pension doesn't work for everyone and we know that it doesn't work all the time—not least because of the difficult track record that this government has had with rolling out IT but also because some people don't have enough money to have an iPhone with a data plan that allows them to be on the internet all the time; they live in an area where the NBN botched rollout means that they don't have access to the data that they need; they can't afford a computer; or perhaps they're of an age or a literacy standard or a background which means that they just don't know how to use that technology. Many people need the face-to-face services that have traditionally come with Centrelink offices and Services Australia. The Centrelink office in Frankston has social workers who are there to help people with complex needs not just to work out what payment they may be entitled to but also to work out what are the hurdles in their lives that are stopping them from taking the next step forward. That's an essential service which perhaps can be done on the phone—and which, during the COVID pandemic, has been done on the phone more than ever—but often requires that real relationship and face-to-face contact. In the name of cost-cutting, however, this Morrison government has taken the approach to Centrelink offices and Services Australia which isn't one where online complements that face-to-face service that so many need but is looking to replace it. Just outside my electorate in Mornington—which used to be part of Dunkley but is now part of the electorate of Flinders—there is a Medicare and Centrelink office. It's used by people in my electorate—predominantly pensioners from Mount Eliza and some from Frankston South—and it's used by people in the Mornington area. Some 800 people visited Mornington services centre every week before the pandemic. Yet, at the very start of this pandemic, this Morrison government made a decision in the dead of night and without any consultation with anyone—it would seem without consultation with the member for Flinders, who's the Minister for Health and Aged Care—to shut down that office. It was to go on 23 March 2020. It took an amazing community campaign to get a reprieve. It took locals from Mount Eliza and from Mornington. It took the Mornington support information service and the council. I got onboard with the campaign. It took petitions. It took interviews with the media. It took inquiries to the government to say, 'What are you doing?' for us to even get a reprieve for that centre for six months. It was only in September of this year that we finally heard that the Mornington Service Centre will stay open at least until March 2022. But, given the effort and the blowback from the community, we're confident we can keep that pressure on. I was proud and pleased to be part of that campaign—for the people of my electorate, in Mount Eliza and Frankston South, who used Mornington Centrelink; for the people not in my electorate who needed to use that Centrelink service; and for the people in my electorate who used Frankston Centrelink, which would have been even more overwhelmed. This government is letting people down in their time of need, and it has to stop. The global pandemic isn't over, and the needs of our people for social services aren't over. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER E09 There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Cybersecurity 145 12:41 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher I move: That this House: (1) notes: (a) a number of Australian businesses have been impacted by cyber-attacks including by ransomware in 2021; and (b) ransomware is a common and dangerous type of malware employed by cyber-criminals that can affect both individuals and organisations, and cause severe damage to reputation, and business bottom lines; (2) records its concern at the impact and frequency of cyber-attacks on Australian individuals and businesses; (3) further notes the significant investment by the Government of $15 billion in cyber and defence capabilities, including $1.35 billion through the Australian Signals Directorate/Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC), to keep Australians safe online; (4) recognises the important work done by the ACSC providing advice and technical support to individuals and businesses affected by cyber incidents; (5) urges all Australians to implement good cyber hygiene measures across their home and business networks; and (6) encourages all Australians to visit cyber.gov.au and take the steps to protect themselves, their businesses, their families, and Australia's digital sovereignty. According to survey data compiled by cybersecurity company NortonLifeLock, some 7½ million Australians over the past 12 months have experienced cybercrime and more than 1.4 million Australians were victims of identity theft. Every eight minutes, a case of cybercrime is reported to the Australian Signals Directorate or the Australian Cyber Security Centre. The impact of these incidents on individuals can be catastrophic and life-changing. Almost overnight, a person's life savings can be taken from them, with no chance of recovering those funds. Businesses face extortion or being locked out of their intellectual property and their bank accounts. Individuals' digital identities can be stolen and used to apply for bank loans, false identity documents and more. In the past year, according to NortonLifeLock, over $3 billion was lost by Australians as a result of cybercrime. Even the ACCC's more conservative methodology suggests the figure is as much as $1 billion. Each individual had to spend an average of 8.2 hours trying to resolve the issues caused by cybercrime, costing our economy billions more in lost opportunities. The average amount taken from an Australian business impacted by cybercrime is more than $33,000, while the average cost of recovering from the incident runs at more than $10,000. Often it is far more. It is no wonder that 70 per cent of Australians now see the protection of their personal information online as a major concern in their life. The Morrison government is very alive to these concerns and is taking unprecedented action to protect Australians. We have a great example of that work in my own electorate of Fisher, where the government supports an organisation called IDCARE, which is led by cybersecurity expert David Lacey. I'm grateful to the Minister for Home Affairs for recently joining me in visiting IDCARE to hear directly from David about the impacts this scourge is having on our community. David informed the minister that demand for IDCARE's services, helping people to mitigate the impact of cybercrime on their life, has increased fourfold since 2015. IDCARE has now supported more than 200,000 Australians since its establishment in 2014. The Morrison government recognises the growing importance of IDCARE's vital and market-leading work, which is why we recently announced $6.1 million in funding to continue providing their services to another 54,000 Australians. In total, the government is investing $15 billion in cybersecurity and defence capabilities. This includes $1.67 billion to keep ordinary Australians safe online through our Cyber Security Strategy 2020. We're developing a national plan to combat cybercrime, which will bring together the powers and capabilities of all our law enforcement, intelligence and security agencies to tackle this challenge. We're already deploying the Australian Signals Directorate's world-leading offensive capabilities to disrupt cybercriminals overseas and conducting sophisticated operations like Project Ironside to catch them in the act. The government has also introduced legislation to strengthen the powers available to the AFP and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission and to increase the resilience of our critical infrastructure. However, we all need to do our bit to fight cybercrime. As I've heard directly from David Lacey at IDCARE, there are a few straightforward steps that we can all take to be safer online. Make sure you're updating your apps and operating systems regularly with the latest security patches. Watch out for links sent to you by messaging services and by email. Use multifactor authentication and pass-phrases where available, and make sure your passwords are complex and hard to guess—no more 'Password' passwords. Finally, always make sure you keep a backup of your data offline, and if anyone phones you asking for any personal details, make certain they are who they say they are. If you are in any doubt, do not give out critical information. Please visit cyber.gov.au; the website of the eSafety Commissioner; idcare.org; or call 1300CYBER1 to find out more and protect yourself. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER E09 Is the motion seconded? Dr Webster 281688 The motion is seconded and I reserve my right to speak. 12:46 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand I thank the member for Fisher for moving this motion, though I have to say that the member may have left out a few things along the way that I do want to bring to the attention of the House. I'll start out by saying that, in the ASD and the ACSC, we have some outstanding technical capabilities. They do really fantastic work. There are world-class capabilities in these agencies and we need to ensure that they've got everything they need to do their jobs. The member for Fisher is right to highlight the threat of ransomware, as I have done in this place many times over the last few years. It has been a rapidly growing threat over that time, particularly in the last two years—so significant that the ACSC, in its first Annual cyber threat report, in 2020, labelled it the 'highest' cyberthreat facing businesses and reaffirmed this in its most recent threat report. Unfortunately, despite its agencies continually warning about the threat, the Morrison government has been a little bit slow to wake up to it and even slower to do something about it. I first mentioned ransomware in this place more than four years ago in 2017. In 2019, I warned in this chamber that: We know that this threat is imminent. We've seen it playing out in the United States over the preceding months. If the Morrison government fails to act to get the word out on this issue now, then the consequences of these attacks in Australia for our nation will be on the government's head. Of course, they didn't act. The former Minister for Home Affairs, the member for Dickson, never once mentioned ransomware in this place in his entire time in the role, despite the rapidly escalating ransomware attacks on Australian businesses during his years in the role. We saw multiple Victorian hospitals hit with ransomware in October 2019, BlueScope Steel hit with ransomware in May 2020, transport and logistics firm Toll in February 2020, and one of our biggest breweries, Lion, in June 2020, and countless more that didn't make the news headlines. But what did we hear from the Morrison government about what it was doing to stop those attacks at that time? Crickets. Cybersecurity was at the bottom of the Home Affairs minister's to-do list, and it has been at the bottom of the Morrison government's priority list ever since, with countless opportunities to act passed up. Mr WATTS 193430 The member for Fisher should listen, because one of the first acts of this Prime Minister when he took the job was to abolish the dedicated role for cybersecurity in the ministry. His 2020 Cyber Security Strategy, released in April 2020, mentions ransomware only twice—once in a third-party quote and once in a list of issues the ACSC can advise on. The Department of Home Affairs released its industry advisory report on ransomware in March 2021, but it consisted entirely of advice to business and included no new government policy initiatives. Australia's International Cyber and Critical Technology Engagement Strategy, also released in April, only mentions ransomware once, in a list of past attributions of cyberattacks, and again includes no new policy initiatives. Now, to her credit, the current Minister for Home Affairs said that cybersecurity was 'a priority' for her on coming into the job. Unfortunately, only when the scourge of ransomware has escalated to a crisis point has the government started paying attention. We've seen high-profile ransomware attacks on the Nine Network; on JBS, our biggest meat supplier; and, internationally, on the Colonial pipeline. Now, Labor, having recognised this threat some time ago, has tried to be constructive in this area. We haven't just stood on the sidelines and criticised; we've proposed ideas. In February this year, we released a discussion paper calling for a national ransomware strategy designed to increase the costs and reduce the returns of ransomware attacks on Australia and outlined a series of ideas for how we could go about it. Among others we recommended a mandatory notification scheme for ransomware payments, an idea we crystallised in a private member's bill in June. We recommended renewed efforts to close a cyberenforcement gap, through increased law enforcement cooperation; a new campaign of offensive cyberoperations against ransomware crews that target Australians; and new anti-money-laundering interventions against cryptocurrency exchanges, to cut off their payment systems. I'm pleased to see the government has now adopted all of these proposals, if somewhat belatedly. In July 2021, the government launched a multiagency ransomware task force, targeting ransomware and led by the AFP, called Operation Orcus—tick. In October, nine months after we called for a national ransomware strategy, the minister released a Ransomware Action Plan—totally different—tick. Included in the plan were new anti-money-laundering laws—tick; powers targeting cryptocurrency payments—tick; and new commitments to join international cyberoffensive operations against ransomware crews—tick. The new plan even included a mandatory notification scheme, not just for payments but for all ransomware attacks. This, I admit, came as a bit of a surprise, as, when the minister was asked why the government wouldn't simply support Labor's widely welcomed private member's bill to require notification of ransomware payments, she said: "What I don't want to do is end up putting the cart before the horse effectively, and moving directly to 'this is a mandatory reporting of ransomware' …" She didn't want to act because the government hadn't 'gone through the process of raising awareness of cybersecurity and raising awareness of ransomware' with Australian organisations. If a ransomware payment notification scheme was too much too soon for business, according to the minister, it's difficult to see how the notification scheme for all ransomware attacks isn't too much today. Regardless, the distinction is likely to be moot, as there are not enough sitting days left before the election to pass this bill. The government dithered— (Time expired) 12:51 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I thank the member for this motion. Cyberattacks are a deliberate act of manipulating or destroying computers, networks or information, and I strongly support the government's significant investment in its prevention. Cyber is a new battlefield which we must be prepared to protect, as it poses threats to individuals and businesses alike. The Australian Cyber Security Centre received over 60,000 cybercrime reports last financial year, and it is reported that 7.5 million Australians experienced cybercrime. This has resulted in over $3 billion lost by Australians as a result of cybercrime and over $61 billion lost in trying to resolve issues created by cybercrime. The problem of cyberattacks has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, as people are spending more time online than ever. While continuing to increase their usage, using the internet and various other online devices connecting to the internet, 48 per cent of Australian consumers feel more vulnerable to cyberattacks now than prior to the pandemic. Despite feeling vulnerable, our usage continues to increase. Although many Australians are taking steps to protect their cyberactivities, including 70 per cent of Australians taking more precautions online, individual actions alone do not quell the rising threat of coercive activity that could undermine Australia's digital sovereignty. Overcoming this risk is a team effort that has government, organisations, business and individuals working together for the common goal of protecting Australia's cyberspace. I'd like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the important work of the Australian Cyber Security Centre. They are a critical part of the team, providing information to businesses and individuals on how to protect themselves online and providing technical support to those affected by cybercrime. This government is committed to developing the next national plan to combat cybercrime, a plan that will build on the Cyber Security Strategy 2020. We have a duty to Australians to ensure that we are doing everything we can to prevent and manage cyberattacks, and we are meeting this obligation by investing $15 billion in cybereducation, offensive capabilities and task forces to tackle cybercrime. I want to spend a moment speaking on the biggest threat to Australia's online security, and that is ransomware—a malicious type of software that cybercriminals use to deny individuals and organisations access to their information and demand payment to have this access returned. Perhaps the most concerning attacks using ransomware in recent times have been those targeted at our banks. Banks have been disproportionately affected by cyberattacks, with banks in the US experiencing a staggering 1,300 per cent year-on-year increase in ransomware attacks this year. This is also occurring here on our own soil, with the Reserve Bank of Australia reporting that a significant cyberattack is inevitable, given year-on-year growth. The Australian government is acting appropriately and pre-emptively to mitigate this threat to financial institutions, and we are protecting the privacy and information of all Australians. Strong, defensive cybersecurity is the best chance we have against ransomware, which is why the ACSC have a variety of resources available regarding ransomware and protecting against attacks, alongside a free alert service for all Australians and Australian businesses. I would encourage all Australians to visit cyber.gov.au and to have a read of the Ransomware Attacks Emergency Response Guide and the Ransomware Attacks Prevention and Protection Guide. There are also personal security guides with advice on how to protect yourself from common cyberthreats. To keep these practical and simple, there are five simple things you can do to protect yourself online. Update your apps and computer systems. You can do this by simply turning on automatic updates. Use multifactor authentication. Use pass phrases, not passwords, making sure they are complex. Back up your data in a place separate from your network. Beware of emails and messages from unknown organisations or people. In fact, a message just came through on our parliamentary network this morning reminding us not to open up unknown addresses. I reiterate that dealing with cybercrime is a team effort, and we all need to pull our weight to secure Australia's digital environment. Again, I thank the government and the ACSC for the hard work that they do, and the Australian businesses and individuals who are taking the time to educate themselves. 12:56 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I rise to speak on this important motion before the House regarding cyberattacks. I thank the member for Fisher for raising this in the parliament and recognise all the contributions so far. This is an issue that I think unites us all: keeping Australians safe. Ransomware attacks are now the biggest threat facing the Australian government, businesses and our broader community, according to the Australian Cyber Security Centre, who warn that these attacks, where criminal groups deny access to an organisation's IT systems and data until a ransom is paid, are becoming more sophisticated and far more damaging than ever before. Ransomware is the most common breach of an organisation's data security. Increasingly savvy cybercriminals now target organisations, extracting hundreds of thousands of dollars from each successful attack and helping to drive small and medium-size enterprises out of business. Australia is not alone in this crisis. The former director of the US Department of Homeland Security Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency recently told the US House Committee on Homeland Security that ransomware is the nation's top cyber threat. Globally, security firm MC Soft estimates that the global cost of ransomware attacks in 2019 was at the very least US$42.4 billion and is likely to be closer to US$169.7 billion. Here in Australia these attacks are estimated to cost our economy at least US$1.1 billion. It's difficult to capture the full scope and scale of these attacks, both globally and here in Australia. But these numbers show us that action is necessary to combat this threat. We need a national ransomware strategy. This issue isn't going away anytime soon, and it cannot be up to the private sector and Australian organisations to fight this threat alone. While organisations have primary responsibility for their own cybersecurity, the government does have tools at its disposal that could help reduce the risk for Australian organisations and lower the overall volume of attacks here in Australia. These include regulation making, law enforcement, diplomacy, international agreement making, effective cyberoperations and the imposition of sanctions. These interventions can make Australia less attractive overall to cybercriminals by increasing risks for attackers and attaching significant cost to targeting Australian businesses and organisations. With a strong basis of deterrence, the federal government can shore up our national cybersecurity by assisting stakeholders to increase their resilience against such attacks. These interventions are important, because we know that ransomware attacks do not exist in a vacuum. The actions of one organisation can shape the nature of the threat faced by others. When an organisation decides that it's in its own best interests to pay a ransom, that increases the resources available to ransomware crews to mount further, more-sophisticated attacks against other targets. When a series of organisations from particular countries or particular industry sectors make ransomware payments, it can create a reputation that these countries or industries are valuable targets, increasing the number of future attacks. Whilst network security might be an organisational challenge, ransomware is a threat that requires collective action in response. This is where our federal government must step in and deploy a policy and regulatory framework to mitigate the risk of ransomware. We need a comprehensive national ransomware strategy with the aim of reducing the attractiveness of Australian targets to cybercriminals. While I'm here, I want to highlight a local business in my electorate of Oxley that is making strides in this field, Cryptoloc. Cryptoloc's patent technology ensures that businesses and their customers can interact securely. While most encryption solutions only use one algorithm and two keys, Cryptoloc's patent technology combines three different encryption algorithms into one unique multilevel, multilayer process, and requires three different key pairs located in three separate locations to decrypt protected data. Hailed by Forbes as one of the 20 best cybersecurity start-ups to watch in 2020, Cryptoloc's technologies can be deployed across a wide range of applications, including file storage, document management and counterfeit prevention, and detection solutions to protect businesses and organisations against attacks. Cybersecurity is only going to become more and more important as our world becomes increasingly digital. Businesses like Cryptoloc are leading the way when it comes to risk mitigation and attack prevention. There is no silver bullet against these attacks. Cybercriminals will continue to evolve their strategies. We need to ensure that we are evolving with them, and that our government is agile enough to face the cybersecurity challenges today and— (Time expired.) 13:01 Mr HAMILTON 291387 Groom Cyberattacks are no longer only the concern of very large global corporations. Increasingly, we're seeing small regional businesses fall victim to malware and ransomware attacks. Last year the Australian Signals Directorate and the Australian Cyber Security Centre received more than 60,000 cybercrime reports. That's one every eight minutes—an extraordinary number. A quorum having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 13:02 to 13:07 There's a concerning trend in the increase in cybercrime we're seeing, and it can have a devastating impact on mum-and-dad operations. I know of one panelbeating workshop in my electorate of Groom which had its files seized and was forced to buy bitcoin to get its digital property back from hackers. It's a cross it certainly could have gone without along with the downtime required to get its systems back online, which was an added pain. This answers, in a way, a similar question to that asked in the title of a song by the Smiths: how small is small? We're talking about very small businesses. In many of these cases, the businesses are single operators with a computer but without much training, and certainly most are having their first interaction with bitcoin. But this changing face of cybercrime victims is a very important reality for Australia to address. It's an issue that no longer belongs on the extremes of either big business or vulnerable grandparents clicking on things they should ignore. Small businesses are no longer a secondary concern of cybercriminals, but in many cases are being specifically targeted, the size of the payday being of less importance than the ease with which it can be won. I know many small-business owners feel this couldn't happen to them or that the cost of implementing cybersecurity measures just isn't worth it. I'm here and the previous speakers are all here to say that it does happen, and the average cost of recovering from cybersecurity incidents starts at around $10,000. But, realistically, usually it's far more. Unfortunately, attacks only have to be successful that one time to cause tremendous damage: money, valuable client information and years of data are able to be swiped in just a matter of minutes. If anything, the increasing move towards working from home during the pandemic has multiplied the risk we face, with employees often working from unsecured networks, particularly in small businesses, instead of the centralised protected location they previously enjoyed. But while this is a new frontier for regional businesses, I'm proud to say that we already have a number of operators leading the way in cybersecurity in the Toowoomba region. I had a fantastic opportunity to take Minister Karen Andrews to see some of them during a visit to my electorate in May this year. I know she was very impressed with the calibre of innovation that was on display. Toowoomba prides itself on taking a punt on new technology, and this is certainly true in the field of cybersecurity. One such project is FKG Group's Pulse Data Centre, which is the first large-scale data centre outside of a major capital city in Australia. It's a magnificent facility that speaks to the future of Toowoomba's regional economy and its ambition to be a bit more of a big city. The centre supports corporate customers, small to medium businesses, governments and international technology giants. Toowoomba is a perfect location for this centre because it can cater intimately and personally to small businesses who have these needs. It has the added physical security of being located outside of a capital city. We have a low threat level. Any natural disaster that impacts Brisbane is unlikely to affect us on top of the hill, or the other side of the hill in this case. The centre also offers strong data security, because Pulse Data Centre is 100 per cent Australian owned. It ensures all data stored in the centre is covered under Australian laws. This is an important issue in an internationally fluid environment. Another important player in this space in the Toowoomba region is Heritage Bank. We were able to show the minister the cybersecurity measures they use to keep their customers' financials safe. It's clearly an issue they take very seriously. I commend them for their efforts. It was great to see the leading edge practices they use to stay ahead of cybercriminals and assist law enforcement agencies. This cooperation with relevant authorities was repeatedly presented as a key driver of the bank's success in this area. That's a very important message for small businesses, too—it's far better to be proactive rather than reactive when it comes to cybersecurity. There's much information available at cyber.gov.au that will be of use no matter the size of your business, including simple tips on checking your systems to ensure you're operating on updated apps and computer software, upgrading the multifactor authentication and keeping a backup of your data off the network. This enables a business IT provider to restore files that may be encrypted or destroyed in a ransomware attack without having to pay hackers for the advantage. The government will continue to play its part, investing $15 billion in cyber and defence capabilities and strengthening protections for our critical infrastructure with new legislation for digital centres and data. 13:11 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I would like to thank the member for Fisher for moving this motion and providing a great opportunity for members to speak on such an important matter to Australia, cybersecurity. It's no surprise that most of Australia's economy is running off the internet, and most businesses rely on online transactions and communications. Although this is the future, it also makes us vulnerable to cyberattacks. Last financial year alone, the Australian Signals Directorate and the Australian Cyber Security Centre received over 60,000 cybercrime reports. That's one every eight minutes, and that's only those that were reported. In the last year, scams are estimated to have cost Australian businesses more than $140 million, at an average of $33,000 taken each time. There is no doubt that Australia risks many more cyberattacks in the future. Cyberattacks are low cost, hard to attribute and can be done at any time, anywhere. Many of us have talked about sovereignty in territorial terms here in this place. But this is changing. Australians need to start the conversation about what it means for Australia to retain and protect its digital sovereignty. We need to protect our critical infrastructure to make sure that digital centres and our data are protected. That's why the Morrison government is investing $1.35 billion through the Australian Signals Directorate and the Australian Cyber Security Centre to keep Australians safer online. This is part of the $15 billion the government is investing in cyber and defence capabilities. As I've said, cyberattacks are low cost and can happen at any time. Anyone in Australia can become a target, whether it's our institutions, businesses or private citizens. In September this year, Stonnington City Council in my electorate of Higgins was hit by a cyberattack. The council drew on assistance from the Australian Cyber Security Centre following the attack and was able to continue operating essential services while it dealt with the outage. But this affects the services that governments deliver. It affects the services that businesses deliver. It undermines our privacy. This attack emphasises the warnings from ASIO that councils across Australia can be subjected to cyberattacks, so too our genetic digital data. It's stored in services across Australia. We need to do more to protect our sovereign data, whether it's government, business or collated medical research data. Protecting it protects Australia's interests. The government is committed to tackling cybercrime, including through developing the next National Plan to Combat Cybercrime, which will bring together the powers, capabilities, experience and intelligence of all jurisdictions to build a strong operational response to cybercrime harming Australians and Australia; investing $1.6 billion through the Cyber Security Strategy 2020; introducing legislation to bolster the powers of the AFP— (Quorum formed) Sitting suspended from 13:15 to 13:19 As I was saying before the suspension, the government is committed to introducing legislation to bolster the powers of the AFP and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission to identify individuals and their networks engaging in a serious criminal activity on the dark web. We also plan to introduce legislation to uplift the security and resilience of Australia's critical infrastructure and provide $6.1 million for support services through IDCARE to protect Australians online, if they've been a victim of cybercrime. It's not only what governments can do, however. Cybersecurity is a shared responsibility. It is vital that Australian businesses and organisations are alert to this threat and take the necessary steps to ensure our—and their—digital data is safe and ensure they're implementing good cyber practices, such as checking systems, making sure their apps are updated regularly and computer systems are at the latest version, and installing any available security patches. We want them to be mindful of links sent to email and other messaging systems, and we want multifactor authentication to make sure there's an extra step between your valuable data—like you bank account—and a cyberattack hack. We want to use passphrases, not passwords, and we want you to keep a backup of your data off your network. I encourage all Australians to go to cyber.gov.au to find easy-to-follow guidelines on how to increase your cybersecurity online. 13:21 Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Hunter In my more than 25 years in this place representing the good people of the Hunter electorate, there have been issues which have stayed with me as a challenge for all of that period. Two really stand out. The first issue is intergenerational unemployment. This is an area in which we've made some inroads, but I have a very strong view that we won't succeed in overcoming this issue until we have an education system that maximises intervention with children at the earliest age, preferably at the level of preschool, if not early child care. It remains my view that that intervention at the earliest possible age is critical with children who have never known their parents or grandparents to have worked, who have never woken up to an alarm clock—or seen others do so—and have certainly never worked to a routine and a schedule. These are people who are, effectively, born to be unemployed. The intervention of those wonderful people who work in early child care, preschool, kindergarten and primary school more generally will be very, very critical in achieving more success on that front. The second issue is the shortage of GPs in many of the towns I represent or have represented. It's not quite as big a challenge to me these days because, with the 2015 redistribution, my electorate substantially shrank from 20,000 square kilometres to 10,000 square kilometres, excising from my electorate many of the more rural townships that found this such a difficult challenge. Alas, though, I still have challenges in townships. I was very pleased that, earlier this year, the minister agreed to provide DPA status, or distribution priority area status, to Muswellbrook LGA in my electorate, which is going to make an enormous difference to people in Muswellbrook, Denman and indeed, the township of Merriwa in the electorate of the member for New England. But what has been consistent, is the inadequacy of the system for all of that time. We don't have a GP shortage in New South Wales; we have a malapportionment of GPs, and— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E09 Order! Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 you're very fortunate because I'm sure you have plenty of GPs in your electorate of Parramatta, Madam Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E09 Order! Member for Hunter— Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Alas in more regional and rural areas, we struggle. Even in a township like Morisset, which is very close to the western side of beautiful Lake Macquarie, on the major train station taking people to Sydney and two minutes drive from the M1. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E09 The member for Hunter will address this remarks to the motion being debated. Mr FITZGIBBON 8K6 Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was looking for some latitude, of course, because this is an unanticipated expectation. So I'm just going to close by saying that I appreciate the attention that Minister Hunt has given to this issue for me in recent days, but I still have a number of issues, including in my home town of Cessnock. I have seen many models used to address this malapportionment. None of them have been perfect. The current system is not perfect, and I hope I can work with the minister to address some of the existing problems, particularly in western Lake Macquarie and, of course, in my home town of Cessnock. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E09 There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Sitting suspended from 13:25 to 16:00 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 151 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Bright: Aged Care 151 16:00 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi I rise to tell you about the historic town of Bright, set along the Ovens River. Bright has long been a favourite tourism and tree-change destination for its proximity to the snowfields, outdoor adventure experiences and world-class food and wine. It is simply gorgeous. It's a place where people move to raise their families and then stay for their retirement. With all this beauty, you would not think there could be anything that I would change in Bright, but there is. For over two decades, the residents of Bright have been calling for a high-needs aged-care facility. They fear for their later years, knowing that, without one, many would have to move away from family and friends if they were to need high care. This is not what they've built their life in Bright for. Yes, Bright is attracting young families, and those same families want services that stretch right across the life span for this beautiful community. The local health service has now delivered a business case for a new, $26-million high-needs aged-care facility, and I've launched a petition calling on the government to provide that funding. This community has waited for decades, and now it's time, finally, for the federal government to step up. I call on the federal government to fund a new high-needs aged-care facility for Bright. Moncrieff Electorate: Volunteers 152 16:01 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff On 23 September, it gave me the greatest pleasure to host the 2021 Moncrieff community volunteer awards at the Nerang Bicentennial Community Centre. The awards provide us with the opportunity to recognise our volunteers for the contributions that they make to the central Gold Coast community. Our volunteers are an inspiration to our community and nation, and we are richer for them. We're lucky to have so many volunteers who do the hard yards in the community to give extra help when required. I'm pleased that we were able to host two presentations this year to accommodate our record-breaking number of nominations, allowing us to celebrate those wonderful 59 individuals for stepping up and standing out as bright shining stars in our community. I congratulate the recipients of the Gladys Moncrieff Award, Bill Wakefield, for his work with domestic violence and self-defence classes, and Julie Clark, for volunteering in the Merrimac State High School canteen for over 30 years and for her dedicated work as the coordinator of Broadbeach 7 division Neighbourhood Watch. I also congratulate Isabella Danaher and the Emmanuel College year 12 girls' sewing group, a group of 40 girls who received the inaugural Gladys Moncrieff Youth Award for those under 18 who show the same traits of service to community. Congratulations to all of the recipients. You are the glue that holds our community together and I'm extremely proud to be your member and represent you in Canberra. Youth Voice in Parliament Week 152 16:03 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie Raise our Voice Australia asked young people to speak up about something that matters to them so their voices could be heard at the highest level. I received a speech from 12-year-old Twaha Noor who attends Richmond High and the agricultural centre of excellence. It's on something important to many people in my electorate of Macquarie—gender equality. I'd like to read it so Twaha's young voice can be heard loud and clear by everyone in this place. She writes: "What is your definition of gender equality?" Well mine is having equal rights and the same opportunities no matter what gender you are. I am a girl and I have faced multiple setbacks in life just because of my gender. At a young age, different people have told me that I can't do specific things because I am a girl. I've realised that this sort of discrimination can happen anywhere. Work, school, anywhere you name. My experiences are proof that gender inequality starts at a young age, meaning it has a profound influence on how you experience and approach life. When doing group work in primary school, my confidence and sincere efforts often meant I was being called "bossy" and "selfish". However, when a boy took the lead, people thanked and respected them. In saying this, I want people to understand that it's not their fault this happens – it's a disturbing societal problem where people are treated differently for reasons they cannot control. Thank you, Twaha, and the nearly other 30 young people who raised their voice. Girls Day Out in STEM 152 16:04 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper Only three short years ago, Girls Day Out in STEM was launched in Port Macquarie. I was there at Charles Sturt University with 250 10- to 14-year-olds and their mums and dads, and they were very excited to be involved in the science, technology, engineering and maths program that day. I'm pleased to say that for this year's Girls Day Out in STEM, from 14 to 22 August, there were a whopping 1,167 registrations all around Australia, bringing registrations over three years to 2,700. Much of the credit for the success of Girls Day Out in STEM should go to Petriea Skitek. The engine, the driving force since 2019, Petriea is changing the lives of young girls across our nation by encouraging them into science, technology, engineering and maths careers for our future generations. I can say, as the Chair of the Standing Committee on Industry, Innovation, Science and Resources, that we will need these young people in those careers in years to come, and it's so important that we close the gender gap that currently exists between boys and girls and men and women all across those areas. Thank you, Petriea, for all your hard work and leadership. You are a great role model and you're changing young lives along the way. Youth Voice in Parliament Week 153 16:06 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith I'm introducing Brydie Zorz, and her speech as part of Raise our Voice Australia's Youth Voice in Parliament program: My name is Brydie, and I'm a proud 18-year-old Wiradjuri woman currently living and studying on Bidjigal land in the Kingsford Smith electorate. When I think of what I want Australia to look like in the next 20 years, I am immediately reminded of the words of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, specifically the line 'When we have power over our destiny, our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.' This reflects a hope for a future we all share: that we will leave our country in a better place for our children and the generations that follow. The youth of this country, especially First Nations youth, deserve a future based on justice and self-determination. We deserve a say on the issues that affect us and for our voices to be taken seriously. We deserve the future our ancestors fought for. I think of a future where First Nations voices are heard, of my children learning about the true history of this country, and how we all address the issues currently affecting First Nations peoples today. First Nations youth deserve a future that allows us to take our rightful place in this country, one where we are valued, our culture is respected and our voices heard. Support for the Uluru statement is clear. Walk with us to ensure this future becomes a reality. Thank you, Brydie, for your outstanding work, and thank you to all the young Australians who took part in the Youth Voice in Parliament program. Regional Victoria: COVID-19 153 16:08 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland I rise to recognise the millions of Victorians who are have endured some of the strictest lockdown conditions during the COVID pandemic and to acknowledge the stress and anxiety that has been caused them, in being separated from their loved ones for extended periods. But I also want to acknowledge this afternoon that the Victorian travel restrictions are about to ease significantly. From this Friday at six o'clock, due to the high vaccination rates, Victorians will be able to travel more freely across the community. In fact, many metropolitan people will travel to the regions for the long weekend. While this will be a weekend of great joy for a lot of people, with family reunions, there will also be some degree of nervousness in the community about having large crowds gathering in our regional centres. Many of the regions have largely avoided the direct impacts of the pandemic, and there will be a concern amongst some people in regional towns about large numbers of people turning up in such a short period. I acknowledge that that nervousness will be there. But it's also such a positive thing for our communities to see local businesses in the accommodation and hospitality sectors have the opportunity to open up. So our challenge is to make sure we all treat each other with respect during these difficult times. Regional communities like mine in Gippsland have been through drought, bushfires and the impacts of the coronavirus pandemic, and I urge people coming to the community: please come, but please respect the community you're visiting. Understand the need for physical distancing, excellent hand hygiene and mask wearing where appropriate. The virus will not go on holidays. We need to make sure we continue to respect the health advice and look after each other in these challenging times as we recover from the pandemic. Petition: Airservices Australia 153 16:09 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley On Monday, the Standing Committee on Petitions tabled a petition calling on the House of Representatives to free Airservices Australia from regulatory capture and ensure the Air Services Act protects the human and natural environment, community amenity and residential areas from the effects of the operation and use of aircraft. The petition also calls upon the House to review the Liberal-National government's decision in 2007 to approve the second runway at Brisbane Airport. I would like to thank Margaret and Amanda, who came to my mobile office in Wavell Heights to raise the issues around this petition with me. This seems like a pretty commonsense petition, and I call on the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development to provide a timely response to the suggestions for noise mitigation and to avoid any further buck-passing. As we know, the Morrison government isn't a big fan of inquiring into the decisions of its past or its present ministers, and it will never miss an opportunity to shaft the blame to another government or regulatory body, so we will see what the Deputy Prime Minister delivers. Going forward, I will be drafting my own submission on behalf of the Lilley electorate to the Brisbane Airport Post Implementation Review Advisory Forum. I encourage northsiders who are living in my electorate of Lilley to send me an email by Friday 29 October if they would like to contribute to my submission. I thank the House. National Security 154 16:11 Mr CONNELLY 282984 Stirling Our Indo-Pacific region is in the midst of the most significant strategic realignment since World War II. Australia must be able to deploy military power to shape our environment, deter actions against our interests and respond, when required, with military force. To do so, we require new military capabilities, and maritime strike missiles will form a crucial element of our defence capability. I was grateful to have been hosted last week by defence industry participant Kongsberg and their Australian defence general manager, John Fry—a fellow ex-Australian Army officer. John briefed me on the capabilities of their naval strike missile, or NSM. Where NSM excels is in the important attribute of survivability. Its ability to fly very low and its stealth capabilities help it to avoid detection. NSM have become the maritime strike weapon of choice for many of Australia's allies around the world. Because of its survivability, precision and lethality, it has been contracted by the Norwegian, Malaysian, German, Polish and Romanian navies, as well as the United States Marine Corps. Kongsberg had previously been selected to provide missiles to Australia, both antiship and surface-to-air missiles. And I feel sure that, as we look to select particular capabilities and platforms, the NSM will be an attractive option as we look to continue to meet Australia's defence needs into the future. Climate Change 154 16:12 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner On Saturday I joined Labor leader, Anthony Albanese, at SolarHub, which has installed solar panels for more than 10,000 Canberra families since it was founded a decade ago. Yet, while Australians are keen on renewables, the Morrison government has let us down. One-tenth of new vehicles in Britain are fully electric; in Australia, the figure is less than one in 100. Australia's grid isn't sufficiently joined up. We've seen the Nationals tail wagging the Liberal dog. Senator Canavan wants homeowners to pay higher mortgages to support his climate denialism. The member for Hinkler wants a $250 billion fund—$25,000 for every household—to fund uneconomic fossil fuel projects. And yesterday we saw a Fight Club result in the National Party, signing up to net zero emissions by 2050—over the opposition of Deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce. This will make the federal government the last government in Australia to support net zero. At Glasgow, the conversation won't be about 2050. Most countries signed up to net zero years ago. Instead, they'll be talking about what countries will do by 2030 and the policies that will get them there. Other countries can't understand why Australia, the advanced country most affected by climate change, that has the highest emissions per person, refuses to take serious action on climate change. Nicholls Electorate: Infrastructure 154 16:14 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls It is my absolute pleasure to bring to the House's attention the works that have commenced on the $17 million redevelopment of Shepparton's Maude Street Mall. The Maude Street Mall is right in the heart of the Shepparton CBD retail precinct. This game-changing project will help transform Shepparton's central business district, and ensure our productive and vibrant region remains strong and prosperous. The mall revitalisation will drive economic growth and create local jobs. As the member for Nicholls, I'm proud to see the project come to fruition, with co-funding from the Liberal-National coalition government from our Building Better Regions Fund—and it was an $8.5 million contribution. Stage 1 is currently under construction, and most of the work with stage 1 will be completed by the end of this year. New playground equipment will be installed early next year. The project design has been developed by the Shepparton City Council in conjunction with the local traders and the chamber of commerce. I would particularly like to acknowledge the work of John Anderson, who has led the chamber of commerce and made significant contributions towards representing the retail traders with the concept design. This is going to allow for an Australian first, which will be one-way traffic and on-street parking. Many councils, towns and cities around Australia will be looking at Shepparton to see a mall that has been pedestrian-only for the last 40 years being ripped up to allow slow-moving traffic to make its way back to the mall to enable more people to shop at our retail precinct. Cunningham Electorate: Green Connect 155 16:15 Ms BIRD DZP Cunningham I rise today to extend very joyful congratulations to a social enterprise in my electorate, Green Connect, which is an organisation headed up by General Manager Kylie Flament. I congratulate her and the whole team—volunteers and staff. They were the only Australian recipient of the Commonwealth Secretary-General's 2021 Innovation for Sustainable Development Awards. This is a fantastic initiative. As the team said on their Facebook post: The Green Connect farm was built by the community for the community to create jobs, reduce waste and grow fair food, and is now being highlighted at a global level as an example of best practice in sustainable development. It's truly amazing. The Governor-General of Australia, His Excellency General the Honourable David Hurley, who comes from our part of the world, congratulated the team on the award and made the point that they have built an 'impressive, innovative model that reduces waste, improves sustainability and increases connection in the community.' Green Connect grow 92 types of fruit and vegetables. They provide employment opportunities for young people who face barriers such as mental illness, drugs or violence at home and also for refugees in our area, who are bringing their farming skills to such a great initiative. Tropical North Queensland Tourism Industry Excellence Awards 155 16:17 Mr ENTSCH 7K6 Leichhardt It gives me great pleasure to highlight the winners of the Tropical North Queensland Tourism Industry Excellence Awards, which were held last Friday evening in the Rainforestation Nature Park at Kuranda. More than 170 people gathered to celebrate the industry's excellence in innovation by acknowledging the people and businesses at the forefront of tourism in our region. It was great to see so many people from the tourism industry coming together to enjoy themselves in each other's company for an evening, especially given the widely publicised hardships faced by the industry over the last 18 months. Back Country Bliss Adventures received the Best of Queensland Experience Excellence Award, and Shanice Dale from BIG4 Ingenia Holidays Cairns Coconut received the Customer Service Excellence Award. Weiqing Jacky Ni received the Young Achiever Excellence Award, and Juan Walker from Walkabout Cultural Adventures received the Year of Indigenous Tourism Award. James Dixon, co-founder and managing director of Down Under Tours, received the Outstanding Contribution by an Individual award, and the amazing Cairns Indigenous Art Fair received the Chair's Award for Excellence. Stephen Gregg and Wendy Morris were rightly awarded life membership for their passionate dedication and commitment to our region's tourism sector. Finally, I'd like to take the opportunity to congratulate all the winners, runners-up and finalists in this year's awards. It's people like you who make our tourism industry the best in our nation. COVID-19: Victoria 155 16:19 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser Restrictions are beginning to ease in Victoria, which is a very welcome development for so many families and students, business owners and residents in my electorate of Fraser. While we have a way to go, the progress we've made is a testament to Victorians' willingness to protect themselves, their community and frontline workers with vaccines. I'm delighted that local shopping precincts and hubs like St Albans, Keilor Downs and Taylors Lakes are starting to show signs of recovering their dynamism and vitality. Local business groups such as the Sunshine Business Association, the St Albans Traders and Brimbank council's business roundtable have been powerful and effective advocates for Fraser's small businesses throughout the pandemic. I thank them for their leadership and their advocacy to governments at all levels for appropriate support for our otherwise strong, proud and viable local businesses during periods of an unprecedented lockdown. I want to particularly recognise Fraser's small businesses and commend the work of Go Local First and the Council of Small Business Organisations Australia for their advocacy of this critically important sector. As the Victorian economy opens up, it is critical to support our local businesses, the backbone of our local economies and communities and the employer of so many young people throughout my electorate and many others. I look forward to getting back to Fraser after this sitting week and to visiting the many cafes, restaurants, butchers, grocers, newsagents and all the other wonderful small and family businesses that contribute so much to the character of my community. Butler, Mrs Meryl 156 16:20 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar I rise today to share some cheer during this torrid time in Australia's history. In my electorate of Mackellar there is a jewel of a woman, Mackellar's own version of the charming and charismatic Auntie Mame. Meryl Butler, at the spritely age of 100 years, has won our hearts with her warmth, insight, positivity, and good cheer. Meryl has loved and lost and created so many memories and anecdotes that I could wax lyrical for far longer than the allotted time. This dynamo of a woman attributes her longevity to red wine, dark chocolate and 'a good man'—they're hard to find, Madam Acting Deputy Speaker Claydon. Mr FALINSKI G86 Yes, I know, but she does it in equal measure, member for North Sydney! Meryl believes that life should be embraced and that travel and learning should be pursued. She believes in loads of laughter, independence and a touch of naughtiness. Meryl's love of life and her joie de vivre are evident from the outset. She has found that all the wonderful people you meet in life keep your spirits high—in fact, Meryl bemoans the fact that she just doesn't have time to meet them all as she is a busy bee. We should all take a leaf from Meryl's book, and I will take this opportunity to wish her a very happy 100th birthday. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I'm sure we all do. Paterson Electorate: Volunteers 156 16:21 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson In 2020 nearly 4.9 million adults in New South Wales volunteered their time. The value of the 1.5 billion hours they volunteered is worth $127 billion to our state—what a staggering amount, what a stupendous effort. This month I joined the New South Wales Centre for Volunteering online to celebrate our most distinguished volunteers in Newcastle and the Hunter Valley. Kevin Stokes, who was named Hunter Volunteer of the Year, is a founding member of the award-winning Hunter Region Botanic Gardens and has been volunteering there for 36 years. I come from a long line of gardeners and love the Hunter Valley gardens and I believe that Kevin is just astonishing. Thank you, Kevin, for your efforts. Hayley Johns, who is Maitland's Youth Ambassador, was named Hunter Young Volunteer of the Year for her volunteering with the National Rural Student Network, St John's Ambulance at Maitland, the SES and the Lake Macquarie Youth Advisory Community. Leanne Pitt-Barile, of Black Hill, the New South Wales team leader of national charity Share the Dignity was also awarded—congratulations. Moore Electorate: Health Care 156 16:23 Mr GOODENOUGH 74046 Moore Since 2005 Ramsay Health Care has collaborated with the WA Department of Health to develop and operate Joondalup Health Campus using a public-private model, which has seen our local hospital more than double in size. Looking to the future, attracting additional private sector investment in health care is essential to delivering new facilities at Joondalup hospital to meet the increasing demand for medical services in one of Australia's fastest-growing regions. Senior executives at Ramsay health recently sought support for proposed plans to expand the private hospital and deliver new medical services to meet future growth. Whilst the proposal undergoes formal board approval, it represents a massive private sector investment in our local hospital, which complements the existing $256 million upgrade that is currently in progress. I welcome this private investment in health care in the order of $150 million. The community outcome will be a $400 million investment in new healthcare facilities that will be provided to residents in Perth's northern suburbs through a combination of public government funding and private sector investment. This will deliver confidence and continuity of medical care for my constituents. Whitlam Electorate: Surf Lifesaving 156 16:24 Mr STEPHEN JONES A9B Whitlam With lockdowns coming off and the weather warming up, the beautiful beaches of the southern Illawarra are the place to be at the moment. It has been fantastic to see families and friends enjoying the squeak of sand underfoot and making the most of our spectacular coastline. Spare a thought for those who are keeping us safe while we're enjoying our time in the water: the dedicated volunteers of our local surf lifesaving clubs. Windang Surf Life Saving Club has been keeping locals and visitors safe for almost 65 years, with not a life lost while the patrols have been operating. That's a remarkable achievement given the treacherous nature of the currents that can be created around the lake on that part of the coastline. I wish the club president, Peter Anderson, and his crew, including the fabulous Kaye Norris and her family, who are regularly knocking on my door for grants, all the very best for the coming season. The Warilla-Barrack Point Surf Life Saving Club has been operating since 1959 with similar success. Its strong in training and competition and has many current and former Olympians amongst its ranks. I give a big shout-out to Alan Beveridge, the club president, for all the work he's doing to keep us safe on that beach. Both of these clubs grew out of the grand old dame on our local scene, the Shellharbour Surf Life Savings Club, which was formed way back in 1936. I spoke to Wayne Cavanagh last week and he told me they've got a full roster and busy beaches they're committed to keeping safe. I want to give them a shout-out and thank them for all the work that they do. 4 Aussie Heroes Foundation 157 16:26 Mr HAMILTON 291387 Groom I recently attended the 4 Aussie Heroes Foundation community dinner at the City Golf Club, Toowoomba. The dinner was held to celebrate the efforts of all those who competed in the 2021 Pedals 'n Medals fundraising bike ride that wended its way through the beautiful Darling Downs and into the Lockyer Valley. The foundation exists to aid and support first responder and military personnel, past and present, who are suffering and struggling with PTSD and related mental health issues. Groom's strong military community makes it an ideal place for organisations like this to get in and make a real difference. I very much thank the co-founders, Gerry and Renita Garard, for everything they've done in setting up this wonderful organisation. The guest speaker of the evening, Cathy Nielsen, is a true Toowoomba hero. The insights she shared of her experiences as a frontline police officer, particularly during the terrible tragedy that led to the death on duty of her partner, Brett Forte, reminded us all of the need to support those whose duty it is to serve and protect us. The pride in the eyes of her parents as they watched Cathy speak was evident to all. Indeed, as she spoke of her journey after the event, it was very clear that this wasn't a superwoman but, rather, very much one of us—a regular person who'd been put through the most trying of circumstances and who, like us, had needed a little support to get back up into the saddle. I was very proud to watch Toowoomba's generous heart get behind her and the foundation. I look forward to supporting them again as they continue their very good work. Western Australia 157 16:28 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth The Prime Minister's attacks on Western Australia must stop. We need a friend, not a frenemy, in Canberra. They have attacked Mark McGowan. They said that New South Wales and Gladys Berejiklian were the gold standard. They backed Clive Palmer, and those opposite said nothing as they backed Clive Palmer, unless they were busy loudly cheering. They refused to build dedicated quarantine facilities, until they decided to build them on poisoned land on Bullsbrook. Then the Prime Minister went further. He called us cave people, and the Deputy Prime Minister said that Western Australia was like North Korea. No wonder my constituents call him the Prime Minister for New South Wales. Now even our GST is at risk, being taken from Western Australia and handed back. The New South Wales Treasurer has said he wants to steal money from Western Australia. Only Labor will stand up for Western Australia. An Albanese Labor government will be the partner that Western Australia needs here in Canberra. Federal Labor will work with Mark McGowan, not spend every day undermining and attacking him and his government. We'll work to create new jobs, to protect Medicare and to make sure we buy local and contract local, backing our manufacturing sector and backing Western Australian manufacturing. We'll work together to prevent climate change. Only Labor will stand up for Western Australia. Curtin Electorate: VitalTrace 157 16:29 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I offer a hand of friendship to my colleague the member for Perth—he always does give me a smile to my face! I want to speak about something really important today. It's the fact that all women and babies deserve to have the highest standard of care and best treatment during childbirth. VitalTrace is a medical device start-up company in Curtin that is developing an innovative solution to the global problem of safely monitoring babies during childbirth. It was a pleasure to recently visit the headquarters of VitalTrace, a recent recipient of a federal government Cooperative Research Centres project round, to meet the team and learn more about the company. Current techniques for monitoring babies for poor oxygen, also known as hypoxia, during childbirth are based on outdated technology from the 1960s, which sometimes results in inadequate or inaccurate data. This can lead to serious complications, such as brain or other organ damage, and unnecessary intervention with emergency caesarean sections, all of which can have lifelong consequences for the mother and the child. VitalTrace has brought together a multidisciplinary team of specialist engineers and product developers, clinicians and researchers to develop a medical device that continuously measures a highly accurate marker of fetal hypoxia. This is a potential game changer for women's and children's health, and I'm looking forward to visiting them again to see their further developments. Covid-19: Vaccination 158 16:31 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa I'm delighted to announce that Werriwa has now vaccinated over 80 per cent of eligible residents. Although the rollout was slow because of the lack of vaccine availability, Werriwa has done a fantastic job overcoming all these barriers. I'd like to thank each and every one of my constituents for keeping our community safe. Getting out and getting vaccinated en masse is a unique and massive undertaking. For my community to come forward together shows that we will always do our part in the defence of our loved ones and the health of our community and beyond. Many people in my community have succumbed to COVID-19, and more still are battling the long-lasting effects. However, it has been my community's priority to follow the public health orders and get vaccinated as soon as they could, to keep everyone safe. I'd like to acknowledge all the healthcare workers who have worked tirelessly to do the vaccinations and test for COVID. I want to give a special shout-out to all schools in Werriwa who welcomed their students back today, and a special thanks to all the principals and teachers who supported their students through home learning and helped families in need with hampers and other supports during the extended lockdown. I also give a big shout-out to year 12 as you prepare for your final HSC exams. I really do wish you all the best for the future. I am sure you will do yourselves and your families proud. Bangladesh: Violent Extremism 158 16:32 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra I rise to condemn the senseless violence perpetrated against Hindus in Bangladesh. Recent celebrations of the Hindu festival of Durga Puja have been overshadowed by the atrocities perpetrated by the violent extremists, fuelled by social media misinformation. In recent days there have been widespread reports of killings, sexual violence, and arson against homes and businesses owned by Hindus and desecration of temples. Human rights groups in Bangladesh have documented 3,600 attacks against Hindus in Bangladesh since 2013, although the Bangladesh Hindu Buddhist Christian Unity Council says the number could be much higher than that. The report shows that there have been 550 cases of vandalism and arson against Hindu homes, 440 against shops owned by Hindus and 1,670 against Hindu temples and places of worship. Community leaders have said that the violence of last week had been the worst mob violence against Hindus in Bangladesh's history. I've spoken many times in this place about the persecution of minority faiths in countries around the world, and the persecution of Hindus in Bangladesh is no different. It's important that all necessary steps are taken to ensure that the perpetrators of this senseless violence in Bangladesh are brought to justice. I'm pleased to see that the Bangladesh government has denounced the violence. In a statement, they said that Bangladesh unequivocally condemns the incidents and took serious note of the reactions from within and outside the Hindu community. Reports have shown that the Hindu community in Bangladesh, which makes up approximately 10 per cent of the population, is shrinking as people flee violence. I call on the Bangladeshi government to take more action to protect its citizens now. Bendigo Electorate: Respiratory Clinic 158 16:34 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo After COVID hit, it took the government a few months, but after a while they did set up a respiratory clinic in my electorate of Bendigo. The respiratory clinic in Spring Gully was opened in April last year. Since then, this small clinic has worked hard in partnership with many other health providers and Bendigo Health in my electorate. As of 21 October, they had administered over 15,000 doses of vaccine to people in the community. Within that group, 6,600 people have had both doses at the clinic. They're also a testing site, having administered over 13,000 tests as of 31 October. As I stand here, the figures released today show that 80 per cent of people in my electorate are double-vaxxed, which is a phenomenal effort, and well over 95 per cent of people are single-dosed. Just imagine where we would be if we had had vaccines earlier. Clinics like this could have got our community vaxxed that bit earlier. People in my community would not currently be in hospital, suffering from COVID-19. Businesses would not currently be closed and people would not be at home isolating if this government had just got the rollout happening earlier. I want to thank the people of Bendigo for getting vaccinated and I thank the hardworking health professionals, particularly the people I met at the Bendigo Respiratory Clinic. Reid Electorate 159 16:35 Dr MARTIN 282982 Reid When it comes to multicultural Australia, Reid is the jewel in the crown. I'm so proud of our multicultural small and medium-sized businesses in Reid. Small and family businesses are truly the lifeblood of the Reid community, and the Morrison government will always back small and family businesses—businesses like Pasticceria Papa in Five Dock, which were supported throughout the lockdowns with the help of JobKeeper and JobSaver. In August this year, the owner of Papa's, Salvatore Papa, said to me: 'This is a very tough time, but we are lucky we have government support. We need to get through this, and we will.' The people of Reid got through the lockdown, and now businesses are optimistic about a strong Christmas. Reid is well and truly open for business. Already, in the first six days after lockdown, New South Wales consumer spending has risen 22 per cent, while bars, pubs and clubs reported a 29 per cent increase in spending. So, whether it is the barbers in Burwood or the restaurant owners in Rhodes across Reid, we are seeing the positivity of life once again returning to normal. Our family and small businesses have had a tough two years, but, as a community, we have had their backs. The government has had their backs. Welfare Reform 159 16:37 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley Today I'm speaking on behalf of the 12,580 pensioners in the Oxley electorate—people I proudly represent. I want to make sure their voices are heard in this parliament. When I talk to local pensioners, many of them tell me of the daily financial struggle that they face. A lot of them go week to week, fortnight to fortnight, making sure they look after every penny. And now, thanks to this government, they have one more thing to worry about. Many of them have raised with me their anxieties about the possibility of this government forcing them onto the cashless welfare card. I can see why they are anxious. The government, shamefully, plans to oppose the bill introduced by the member for Bruce and seconded by the member for Richmond that would protect pensioners from being forced onto this outrageous scheme. To leave the door open to force pensioners onto this card—to even consider it as an option—is a disgrace. Pensioners built this country. They paid their taxes their entire lives. They've worked hard to raise their kids and contribute to this nation. And this is how we repay them? Every weekend, I speak to pensioners who are worried that they will not be able to pop down to the local RSL for a cheap meal with their friends or won't be able to buy second-hand gifts for their grandkids. It's disgusting and it speaks to the character of this government. It's simple. If you have no plans to force pensioners onto this cashless debit card, then support our bill. We know that this government is not on the side of pensioners. I am. Labor is. I'm proud to support the bill introduced by the members for Bruce and Richmond, and I'm absolutely disgusted that those opposite do not. Breast Cancer 159 16:38 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay Today, around 55 Australians will be diagnosed with breast cancer. That adds up to almost 20,000 people this year. Everyone in this chamber and across our country will likely know a family member, a loved one, a friend, a colleague or a neighbour affected by breast cancer. Australians suffering breast cancer deserve the best support and the highest-quality care. McGrath Foundation breast care nurses in our local Nepean Hospital and right across Australia embody this spirit. They have supported people with breast cancer and their families, investing in research, and they have adapted their service during the pandemic to help reach people through telehealth, providing physical, psychological and emotional support from diagnosis and throughout treatment. That's why, in my electorate of Lindsay, we're getting behind Pink Up Penrith. Now in its fourth year running, we've raised over $138,000. It's been a challenge this year to fundraise around COVID restrictions, but Penrith CBD Corporation has some great initiatives to make sure our community can get involved in Pink Up Penrith. Australia has one of the highest survival rates for breast cancer in the world, but we must aim higher. I encourage everyone in Lindsay to show exactly why we have the best community spirit in the country and to support Pink Up Penrith. Youth Voice in Parliament Week 159 16:40 Mr HAYES ECV Fowler Sonja is a young constituent in my electorate who joined the Youth Voice in Parliament Week campaign, raising awareness of the need for better access to domestic violence services in our community. Sonja says: It is unequivocal that adequate protection and support is provided to young people fleeing domestic violence. No person should be punished for fleeing their abuser by becoming homeless. She goes on to say: We must break the intergenerational cycles of abuse and trauma that have become an everyday reality for so many and replace this with opportunities and an optimistic future for survivors. One woman is killed every 9 days by a partner. So why do women still lack access to adequate domestic violence support services? In 2020, the number of police recorded victims of family and domestic violence related sexual assault increased by 13%. This national crisis is detrimental to community wellbeing and has been going on for too long, disproportionately affecting women and those with a disability or ATSI background. In 20 years, I hope to see Australia as a place where everyone lives a life of safety and security, where justice is ensured for survivors and where the duty to protect our citizens from violence is upheld. Education 160 16:41 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina One of the best things that we can give our children, apart from a happy home, is education. It forges a future for them. It enables so many opportunities to be open to them. There are 130 schools in the Riverina electorate: 106 primary and 24 secondary. They're all providing great educational opportunities for Riverina children. There is a mix of boarding schools, Catholic schools, independent schools and public schools—all very good institutions of learning. Of course, with COVID, they've all had to adapt to new ways of learning. It has been 20 months of challenging times for teachers, students and, indeed, parents. World Teachers Day is celebrated in Australia on the last Friday of October each year. This year it lands on 29 October. My daughter, Georgina, is a teacher, and I'm very proud of the fact that she was recently promoted to head of English in the middle school at Caulfield Grammar School. That's a tremendous opportunity for her. I know she has told me of the difficulties of teaching children, face to face. She, like other Victorian teachers—and, indeed, other teachers right across our country—has done an amazing job, being able to give that learning, either via telepresence or, now, face to face, through these challenging and difficult times. I commend teachers and I say, 'Thank you very much.' Climate Change 160 16:43 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland Next week, as the shadow minister assisting for climate change and the shadow minister for international development in the Pacific, I'll be representing the alternate government, the Labor opposition, at the Glasgow climate change conference. Decisions made there will have a profound impact upon Australia and upon my region especially. Carbon intensive regions such as mine, the Hunter, must be at the forefront of considerations. That's why it's important that my region be represented there. Rather than considering the profound impact on the Hunter, unfortunately we've been seeing the circus from those opposite, the government. We've seen so-called modern Liberals surrender on the demand for an increased medium-term target, despite that being the key objective of the Glasgow COP. It is equally disgraceful that we've seen certain National Party members—in particular, their ministers—junking their long-term policy positions for 30 pieces of silver. They are junking their policy positions for a pay bump to return to cabinet. Never have I seen such venal manoeuvring as that I've seen over the last 24 hours from certain National Party ministers. The truth is that they don't care about jobs in regions like mine. They don't care about the economic future of our country. They don't care about the opportunities in taking action on climate change. All they care about is their own jobs. All they care about is getting a pay rise. All they care about is their own naked self-interest. Mr Zimmerman 203092 In the member for Shortland's comments, he is reflecting on members in a way that is contrary to the standing orders. He should withdraw. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I don't believe that is the case. Do you wish to make any further comments, Member for Shortland? Mr CONROY 249127 I will not be withdrawing. It's a statement of fact. It's entirely consistent with the standing orders. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 It being 4.45 pm, in accordance with standing order 43 the time for members' statements has concluded. PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS 161 PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS Asylum Seekers 161 16:45 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) asylum seekers are still being held in alternative places of detention, such as hotels, in Australia; (b) many of these individuals have now been detained for over eight years and have suffered significant psychological harm as result of their prolonged and indefinite detention; (c) this program costs taxpayers tens of millions of dollars each year and continues despite: (i) the impact on the physical and mental health of detainees; and (ii) repeated offers to resettle asylum seekers from New Zealand; and (d) the Minister for Home Affairs acknowledged in comments on 21 January 2021 that 'it's cheaper for people to be in the community than it is to be at a hotel or for us to be paying for them to be in detention and if they're demonstrated not to be a threat'; (2) applauds the significant contribution migrants and asylum seekers make to our economy, our democracy, and our vibrant, multicultural community; and (3) calls on the Government to: (a) address the issue of the indefinite detention of asylum seekers in hotels in Australia; (b) honour the Minister for Home Affairs' previous comments and ensure that Australians will no longer see an expensive and cruel program of indefinite detention inflicted on people in our care; and (c) immediately release Priya, Nades, Kopika and Tharaunicaa from detention on Christmas Island and allow them to return to their home in Biloela, Queensland to the community who loves and supports them, and wants them home. This motion was first drafted in March, and unfortunately there has been little progress since that time. I first drafted this motion in collaboration with my friend the member for Cooper, who will be contributing to this debate, and of course I sought the advice of my friends in the hardworking team at the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre. I want to start by again acknowledging all of the work that they and their team have done throughout the pandemic, often in extremely difficult circumstances, to support some of the most vulnerable and isolated people under our care. As of September this year, there are 228 people in offshore detention, in Nauru and PNG, and some 90 people being detained in alternative places of detention, such as hotels. Many in alternative detention were placed there after they were brought to Australia for a medical evacuation, and they are now being held indefinitely here in Australia. I said it in June and I'll say it again: we have had options on the table to resettle people for years, and it is nothing short of cruelty and neglect that we haven't chosen to take them. We have had the New Zealand offer in particular, which has been on the table since 2013, when Prime Minister Julia Gillard did a deal with conservative New Zealand Prime Minister John Key to resettle 150 asylum seekers each and every year. But the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison government decided to rip that agreement up. We could have had zero people in offshore detention right now if we'd taken it up even just a few years ago. The consequence of failing to resettle people in detention and in our care is becoming diabolical. The harm that these people are facing today in our care is getting worse. It's not just the isolation of being held in detention for almost nine years. Now many are facing the risk of a COVID outbreak. In recent days, we have heard of a very serious COVID outbreak at the Park Hotel in Melbourne, where 46 refugees are being held and where 20 have already tested positive. These are the remnants of the people who were transferred to Australia under the medevac agreements. Ironically, they were brought here because they needed extra medical care, but, due to the cruel choices of this government, their lives have been put at risk. We must ask why. Why were they not released into the community when over 100 other medevac transfers were given a ticket into the community? The then Minister for Home Affairs, now Minister for Defence, said at the time that it was cheaper to have people in the community than in detention, yet this government chose to hold these 46 asylum seekers in the Park Hotel. Now almost half of them face a battle with the delta variant, and the reports are not good. Refugees have told advocates that, when they first complained of symptoms, no isolation protocols were implemented, testing was delayed and they were simply offered paracetamol. Because of this foreseeable failure, we now have an active outbreak which was entirely avoidable. More than a year ago, Labor wrote to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs expressing our concerns for vulnerable people being detained in these places during a global pandemic. They haven't been kept safe. Recent information released by the department shows that there has been a lack of effort to vaccinate people in all detention facilities. At the moment, we're seeing about half of detainees and refugees fully vaccinated as compared to a national average of over 73 per cent. The Victorian government has expressed concerns. The ASRC has expressed concerns. The Human Rights Commission, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases and the Australasian College for Infection Prevention Control have also been warning this government, yet it chooses cruelty time and time again. It's time to help people. It's time to end indefinite detention. The least we can do is protect those who are in our care. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Is the motion seconded? Ms Thwaites 282212 I second the motion and I reserve my right to speak. 16:50 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra Australia's the most successful multicultural country on earth. We're home to the world's oldest continuing culture as well as Australians who identify with 270 different ancestries. Since the first Australian citizenship ceremony on Australia Day 1949, we've welcomed over five million new citizens to our shores. We are a prosperous, safe and united country. Our inclusive national identity is built around our shared values, including democracy, freedom, equal opportunity and individual responsibility. As well as building a vibrant and diverse Australia, this government has much to celebrate in its management of migration program. We've brought in skilled migrants who will contribute to our national wealth by bringing critical skills that businesses weren't able to find locally, and we've done our part through the humanitarian program to support persecuted people around the world to find refuge in Australia. Importantly, this has all been done while maintaining the integrity of the border and confidence in the migration program. The government's policy is very clear. People have zero chance of being permanently settled in Australia if they arrive illegally by boat. After dismantling the Howard government's successful border protection policies, Labor lost control of Australia's borders. Between 2008 and 2013, more than 50,000 people arrived in Australia illegally on more than 820 boats, and, tragically, at least 1,200 died at sea. Labor's record is clear. They cannot be trusted with protecting Australia's borders. Since 2013, the government has worked methodically and successfully to end maritime people smuggling into Australia and to clean up this mess. Since coming to government, we've returned 873 people from 38 maritime people smuggling ventures to their country of origin or departure. Over the same period, close cooperation with regional partners has resulted in disruptions of an additional 84 maritime people smuggling ventures, 2,674 potential illegal migrants, and 634 arrests in source and transit countries. While regional processing in PNG is coming to an end, the Morrison government's strong border protection policies, including a commitment to regional processing, has not changed. The Minister for Home Affairs recently signed a memorandum of understanding with the Nauruan government to establish an enduring regional processing capability in that country. This will ensure that regional processing continues as a deterrent against people smuggling. Anyone who attempts to enter Australia illegally by boat will be returned or sent to Nauru. Rather than chaos and tragedy, the Morrison government has restored integrity to Australia's migration program, and we've taken back our borders from the control of people smugglers. While we're tough, we're also doing our part. Australia is one of the most generous contributors to international refugee resettlement efforts, successfully resettling more than 900,000 refugees and others in humanitarian need since the end of the Second World War. We are one of a relatively small number of countries that operate an annual permanent resettlement program and continue to rank among the top three per cent of resettlement countries in both absolute and per capita terms. The humanitarian intake program has been drawn from a range of nationalities, ethnic and religious groups reflecting global displacement arising from conflict and persecution. The humanitarian program aims to provide permanent settlement and resettlement to those most in need, who are often in desperate situations, including in refugee camps and protected refugee situations; to reunite refugees and people who are in refugee-like situations overseas with their family in Australia; to be flexible and responsive to changing global resettlement needs and emerging humanitarian situations to ensure Australia's approach remains comprehensive and high-quality; to use resettlement strategically to help stabilise refugee populations, reduce the prospect of irregular movement from source countries and countries of first asylum and support broader international protection; and, of course, to meet Australia's international protection obligations. All humanitarian program applications are assessed on an individual basis, with applicants required to demonstrate their humanitarian need. Visa grants are ultimately subject to rigorous assessment, including health, character and security checks which are conducted before an individual is granted a visa. While we're supporting those in need through our humanitarian program, we're also supporting Australian businesses to get the skills they need to prosper by providing for a skilled migration program. With the onset of COVID-19, around half a million temporary visa holders, many of whom were skilled migrants, left our shores. This not only had an effect on working holiday makers and on students but on many businesses in Australia that rely on skilled migration to keep their businesses open. On migration, the government has the policy settings right. Unlike the border chaos of the Labor days, we're tough on people smugglers, making sure we stop their pernicious business model in its tracks. At the same time, we have one of the most generous humanitarian programs in the world and we're making sure Australian businesses can get the skills they need. 16:56 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I thank the member for Macnamara for bringing forward an important motion. Our treatment of vulnerable people seeking asylum speaks to who we are as a nation. It's an issue of great concern to many people in my electorate of Warringah and, indeed, to many people in Australia more broadly. As the motion rightly points out and as has, I would say, been ignored by members of government, the program of alternative detention costs taxpayers tens of millions of dollars per year and continues despite the physical and mental health impacts on those who remain in detention. Asylum seekers being held under these arrangements face not only disconnection and uncertainty but also a greater health risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the past month, nearly one-third of refugees and asylum seekers at Melbourne's Park Hotel have tested positive for COVID-19, and the number is expected to grow. At least one refugee has been taken to hospital. It's one of the reasons that the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, Amnesty International and the Australian Medical Association, as well as more than 1,000 medical professionals, have been calling for all people held in alternative places of detention to be released into the community. Across the immigration detention network, vaccination rates are significantly lower than in the community at large: only 61 per cent have had one dose and 54 per cent are fully vaccinated. I call on the government to increase the vaccination efforts for all those who are vulnerable in those environments and expedite the release of asylum seekers and refugees into the community. We're not talking about a large group of people, and some of the narrative that comes from members of government really is ridiculous when it comes to this issue. There are currently 114 people being detained in the alternative places of detention. Earlier this year, Jacinda Ardern reaffirmed New Zealand's offer to resettle them in New Zealand, so I reiterate the call from Craig Foster, Sonny Bill Williams and many in our community to accept this offer. It's time to call game over and ask: why won't the government accept or even consider this offer? We know that 1,440 refugees are being held in onshore immigration detention and there are over 500 people in community detention, including 175 children. That is shameful. The case of the Biloela family continues to linger. That number in community detention includes them, three of whom have been granted year-long visas. But the youngest daughter is a pawn in the government's game and is not being granted that same status. That's why they remain indefinitely suffering in community detention in Perth while they're being prevented from being able to return to their home. It's time to end this charade of saying that this has, in some way, got something to do with protecting our border. Finally, I turn to the Afghan evacuation. I'd like to think that, in these circumstances, we have actually had some common sense, some humanity. I want to thank Minister Payne and Minister Hawke and their officers for their cooperation and assistance during the recent evacuation efforts following the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan. I provided some assistance in getting female athletes out of the country. It was humbling and eye-opening for me and for my staff to hear about their experiences, and I thank the ministers and their teams for their assistance. I thank people like Craig Foster for his tireless efforts, as well as Nikki Dryden, Alison Battisson, Kurt Fearnley and the many, many others who were involved in this effort. Thank you for your dedication to getting these very vulnerable young women and their families to safety. I'm continuing to work closely with groups supporting those who have made it here to Australia, and I will be following how they go in resettling here. And there are still so many trying to flee Afghanistan. The Sydney Alliance is one such group, who I will be meeting with next week to discuss their concerns with the government's response to the ongoing situation in Afghanistan. We need to expand our humanitarian visa scheme to include 20,000 places for Afghan refugees. We need to assist the Afghan Australians with urgent family reunification applications. And we need to grant permanent protection to Afghan nationals already in the community or in Australian immigration detention facilities. It was devastating to hear earlier this week of the death of an interpreter who had assisted Australian Defence Force officials in our mission in Afghanistan. Sadly, I'm sure they're not the only one. I urge the government and its members to do more to assist the provision of temporary visas to those who are very much in need and those who have helped us. There are still so many questions around how we are treating these most vulnerable people and, as always, there's a lot of fearmongering that somehow this goes to our broader border policies, but, at the end of the day, it's our humanity that's at stake. Unfortunately, our actions do not say much for the humanity in Australia. 17:01 Dr ALLEN 282986 Higgins I rise in this chamber to speak on the member for McNamara's motion on those seeking asylum in Australia. Australia has a long and proud tradition of resettling migrants and refugees and vulnerable people in humanitarian need. The horrific situation in Afghanistan is the most recent example of Australia supporting the evacuation of asylum seekers to escape unbearable and dangerous circumstances. In August this year, the Australian government, led by Minister Payne and Minister Hawke, were able to evacuate over 4,000 people from Kabul, making it the largest humanitarian airlift operation in our history. Thank you to Professor Sharon Pickering, a Higgins constituent, who helped bring the plight of a large group of fleeing Afghans with connections to Monash University to my attention so that we could work together to safely bring them to Australia. Following this crisis, the Morrison government announced new funding of $27 million for a tailored Afghan settlement support package to help recent evacuees from Afghanistan settle successfully into their new lives in Australia. Amongst that includes $6 million committed to a specialist legal support for those evacuees and subclass 449 temporary humanitarian stay visas to transition to permanent visas. A further $7.9 million is being committed to the program of assistance for survivors of torture and trauma. We know many of those fleeing Afghanistan have suffered. Many Afghan arrivals are highly skilled professionals with strong English language skills, so $4.8 million has been committed to help new arrivals navigate skills recognition and education pathways to quickly secure suitable employment. These programs follow extensive consultation by Minister Alex Hawke with the Advisory Panel on Australian Resettlement of Afghan Nationals. We are determined, as a government, to help these people resettle quickly, efficiently and safely. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees' most recent estimate, the number of people forcibly displaced globally is now more 80 million, with more than 26 million refugees. This does not include people fleeing the most recent crisis in Afghanistan. Australia needs to continue to make its contribution to dealing with this problem, and encourage our government to continue to increase the envelope that we can provide, particularly as we come out of COVID. However, we never want to return to the situation that was allowed to happen under the Labor government in 2013, when at least 50,000 people arrived in Australia by boats that were often not seaworthy, with, tragically, more than 1,200 dying at sea. Since 2013, our government has worked methodically and successfully to end maritime people smuggling. The government is committed to the welfare of those seeking refuge here. Healthcare services are provided through onsite primary and mental health clinics, with referral to allied and specialist health providers as required as their claims are being processed. Acute medical care is provided by hospitals, if needed. I understand the government is presently in discussions with New Zealand with regard to a generous resettlement offer. The contents of these discussion remain confidential, but I look forward to a speedy resolution. Since the first Australian citizenship ceremony on 26 January 1949, we've welcomed more than five million new citizens to our shores, including 900,000 refugees. They bring with them stories of their journey to our country as well as their rich culture and a myriad of languages and religions, which add to the wonderful and diverse multiculturalism that's modern day Australia. One such person is Najaf Mazari, who runs a successful business in my electorate of Higgins. He came to Australia 20 years ago as a refugee from Afghanistan. He's written a very moving book about his extraordinary story of escape from Afghanistan and his new life in Australia. The Rugmaker of Mazar-e-Sharif was on the VCE reading list for four years, and Najaf was nominated for Australian of the Year in 2012. Proceeds from the sale of Najaf's book have funded the development of AusGhan Aid, a charity that Najaf founded to support over 70 villages in Afghanistan—a true story of hope. Najaf has been very grateful for the support the Australian government has given to help bring his compatriots safely to Australia following the most recent crisis in Kabul. As I said in my first speech: I want to ensure that those who seek a better life in our country are warmly welcomed and made at home, that they are given the same opportunities as all Australians to aspire to a better life. I'm proud of Australia's response to the recent crisis in Afghanistan and look forward to the successful resettlement of those fleeing persecution and their contributions to Australia like Najaf's. 17:06 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper I rise to speak to the motion moved by my good friend and colleague the member for Macnamara, and I thank him for moving this motion. Two years ago, I was horrified to discover that in my electorate of Cooper a local hotel on a busy Melbourne arterial road was being used pretty much as a prison. The Mantra Hotel was an alternative place of detention, or an APOD, housing men who had come to Australia under the medevac legislation. They had come to Australia to be treated for their ill health. This hotel in my community was part of a complex of hotels, conference centres, bars, wedding reception halls and even a suite of offices for local businesses, a place where lots of people from our community would mix, celebrate and work. I myself attended many events there. It was so hard to believe that, all the while we were going about our business and pleasure, on that same site sick, very unwell men were locked up and being subjected to treatment that amounted to mental torture, right before our unseeing eyes. It was confronting. I, of course, had known about the horror of indefinite detention, both offshore and in places like MITA, with its barbed wire and high walls, and that is horror enough. Indefinite detention of asylum seekers should not happen, but I'd never heard of an APOD before. Such a term wasn't in my lexicon. It's a new kind of terror, particularly because it predominantly affects very unwell people. Back in January 2020 I managed to visit the men in the Mantra. I saw the toll that indefinite detention had taken on them. I could see it in their eyes. Some were of course angry, some were sad and some were numb, and others were clearly so unwell that they could hardly speak. My old nursing assessment skills kicked in, and alarm bells rang very loudly in my head. I saw one man who was so ill and so thin, and his skin was such a dusky colour. He was unable to eat because his teeth were so bad. I sat with the men and I listened. A couple of them I met bravely became the public voice of the group inside. 'Moz' and Farhad are two well-known advocates now. Farhad called me one night when he was in the Mantra. He was being subjected to a cruel, late-night upheaval, being forcibly removed from his room, with no explanation. He was not allowed to take any of his belongings. He was extremely distressed. I was speaking to him as it was happening and I felt powerless. Then, in March that year, COVID-19 broke. I immediately wrote to the then minister about the potential for an outbreak at Mantra, as did the shadow assistant minister, the member for Scullin. Numerous organisations, including the Human Rights Commission, the Commonwealth Ombudsman, the Australasian Society for Infectious Diseases and the Australasian College for Infection Prevention and Control also warned the government about the potential for an outbreak. The conditions were perfect for it to spread. Anyone could see it coming, with guards coming and going, cramped, overcrowded conditions, the inability to social distance and poor ventilation. It was always going to happen, and the government should have seen that. The men should have been released into the community, for so many reasons, but, importantly, to avoid the spread of COVID-19. But there was no action from the government. Some people were, thank goodness, released into the community, but others were not, and now, in the new APOD, the Park Hotel, the worst has happened: of 46 men held at the Park Hotel, 20 have been infected with COVID-19. We now have an APOD health crisis. One man is in hospital. It's difficult to know how ill the others are. The Asylum Seeker Resource Centre have said that there have been significant delays in test results for people in the Park Hotel and that people are being re-tested due to poor quarantine conditions. The care has not been adequate. It's dangerously inappropriate to have the men on this site, particularly when they are immunocompromised and at heightened risk. We've heard that they have to monitor their own oxygen levels. What happens, I wonder, if someone becomes far too ill in the night to even lift their arms and test their own oxygen level? They wait hours to see the single nurse. They can't, often, even get Panadol. Two years ago, when word spread about the APOD, the community held protests, first weekly and then daily. Our wonderful Cooper Grans for Refugees were among the amazing advocates. The Refugee Action Collective have been instrumental in organising these actions. I want to thank everyone who has spoken up. We will not stop till these men are safe. In Australia, everyone deserves that. (Quorum formed) 17:16 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga I thank my colleague the member for Macnamara for moving this very important motion. He is absolutely right to note that asylum seekers are still being held in alternative places of detention in Australia, such as hotels, and that this is just not appropriate. It is just not good enough that people are still being held in unsafe and cruel conditions. In Melbourne at the moment, asylum seekers are being held at the Park Hotel, and we now have a situation where there's been an outbreak of COVID and at least one person has had to be taken to hospital. It is not clear if the appropriate arrangements around infection control are in place to keep people safe in this place of detention. It is unacceptable that the Morrison government has left these asylum seekers in an unsafe position during a global pandemic. I thank the members of my community who have contacted me who are very concerned about these asylum seekers at the Park Hotel and about the government's lack of care for them. They've been very concerned about evidence put to a Federal Circuit Court hearing recently that an ambulance called for one of the men who was detained in this hotel—called by his friends when they were concerned that he was having difficulty breathing—wasn't allowed access to treat him. These members of my community are, rightly, horrified at the possibility that this is how we treat anybody in our country. Of course, many of these people in detention have been detained for far too long, and they are already suffering significant psychological harm as a result of their prolonged and indefinite detention. It is not okay for asylum seekers to be detained in hotels indefinitely. We must move away from this practice of detaining people indefinitely. It doesn't have to be this way. This government has had repeated offers from New Zealand since 2013 that would have allowed them to resettle asylum seekers, yet they refuse to take up these offers, despite this detention being unnecessarily cruel and despite it costing tens of millions of dollars each year. But unnecessary cruelty is a hallmark of this government when it comes to treatment of asylum seekers. I have spoken before in this place about the situation of Priya, Nades, Kopika and Tharunicaa: the Biloela family. This family has been held in detention for years, including in isolation on Christmas Island. It was only after Tharunicaa got very sick with a blood infection that the government removed them from Christmas Island. This is the level of humanity of this government; it takes a little girl ending up in hospital for some degree of decency to be shown. And of course it is only some degree, because this family is still in community detention in Perth and cannot return to Biloela. But the community of Biloela have made it clear that they love and support this family, and that they're valued members of their community. They want them back as valued members of their community, but, despite this government having the power to rectify the situation at any time, they continue to separate the Biloela family from their community. It is time to bring them home to Bilo. That brings me to another very important part of this motion: that this House 'applauds the significant contribution migrants and asylum seekers make to our economy, our democracy, and our vibrant, multicultural community'. It is so important that we recognise this. Biloela wants their family back because they work in their community and they contribute to community life—and that happens right across our country. You wouldn't hear about it if you listened to this government, if you heard the fear that is pushed out from this government. But it certainly happens in my community, where we appreciate the contribution that refugees and asylum seekers make locally. There are so many groups in my community who work on behalf of supporting refugees and asylum seekers, and I want to thank them all. I thank the Montmorency Asylum Seekers Support Group, who are in constant contact with me about individual cases that they think need following up on because they're concerned about the conditions these asylum seekers are being detained in, and about broader issues of policy around how we are unnecessarily cruel under this government. I thank Jagajaga Grandmothers for Refugees, who also speak up. I thank Welcome to Eltham, a real example of what can be achieved locally. They supported Syrian and other refugees to be settled successfully into our local community and to be welcomed. These are the success stories. These are the people who care. These are the people this government should be listening to, and this is what should be happening across this country. It is what would be happening if it were not for the needless and pointless cruelty of this Morrison government. Debate adjourned. National Disability Insurance Scheme Workforce 166 17:22 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I move: That this House: (1) recognises the Government's commitment to ensuring there is a strong, skilled and sustainable National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) workforce by launching the NDIS National Workforce Plan; (2) acknowledges that the disability workforce will require an additional 83,000 workers over the next few years to strengthen the responsiveness, quality and capability of the NDIS workforce and complements other Government reforms to build a simpler, fairer, faster and more flexible NDIS; and (3) recognises the Government's 2021-22 budget investment of $12.3 million in the Care and Support Workforce Package over the next two years to cut red tape and promote regulatory alignment across the aged care, disability and veterans' care sectors. I'm pleased to move this motion and speak to the importance of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, the NDIS, and our government's ongoing commitments to the scheme. The NDIS is a world-first, history-making scheme. Recent data has shown that the program is growing at a record rate. The NDIS is now supporting over 466,000 Australians, which is an outstanding achievement. Almost a quarter of a million people are receiving support for the very first time, and one in three of those are children aged zero to six years. There's been a 14 per cent increase in the number of young adults reporting that the NDIS has helped them with their daily living activities and a 12 per cent increase in the number of participants reporting that the NDIS has helped improve their health and wellbeing. So far, the NDIS has been life-changing. These statistics reflect why it is so important that our government continues to ensure that the scheme is viable into the future. The Australian government is committed to delivering on the NDIS, and that includes ensuring that there is a strong and sustainable workforce to support it. That's why I'm happy to recognise the launch of the NDIS National Workforce Plan. The plan is designed to attract workers with suitable skills, values and attributes while also improving existing workers' access to training and development opportunities. We know that 530,000 participants will be supported by the NDIS when the scheme reaches full maturity in the next few years. To meet this demand, an additional 83,000 workers will be needed to support these participants, to bring our total workforce to 353,000 people. This includes in-home and in-community support workers, allied health professionals and also managers and other professionals. Meeting this demand will be a significant challenge, especially in regional areas. Workforce remains a key challenge across several sectors in my electorate of Mallee, including health, agriculture, and manufacturing. Unfortunately, this story is much the same for the care and support sector in Mallee. That's why we need a solid plan in place to meet the needs of NDIS participants now and in the future. Our plan will enable workforce growth in the NDIS and support complementary workforce measures in aged care and support services for veterans. This is an important measure, because we know that disability support, aged-care and veterans care programs are highly connected. Thirty per cent of aged-care providers also operate in the NDIS or veterans care programs, and 36 per cent of veterans care providers operate across all three sectors. The plan will also support the sector to attract a wide range of workers, while improving existing workers' access to training and development opportunities. We are improving access to entry-level pathways and providing greater opportunities for training and development. Students, school leavers and jobseekers will have improved access to entry-level career pathways, including supported traineeships and placements. Currently, Boosting the Local Care Workforce coordinators are working with schools and employment services to connect prospective workers with educational institutions and professional bodies within the sector. Commonwealth, state and territory governments will work in partnership with workers, NDIS participants, industry, and education and employment providers to retain and grow the required skilled workforce. The plan ensures that care and support workers will receive the best training available in order to satisfy the complex needs of a large and diverse group of participants. It will do this through updates to nationally recognised training programs and the development of microcredentials to allow workers to quickly upskill, while also providing pathways to recognised qualifications. Embedded in this training will be the standards for attitudes, behaviour, skills and knowledge as established by the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission's NDIS Workforce Capability Framework. The development of a skills passport will also strengthen the recognition of training in the sector by recording and verifying qualifications, screening checks and references for individual workers. This plan complements other Australian government reforms to build a simpler, fairer, faster and more flexible NDIS. Last week our government passed legislation to better protect NDIS participants from the risk of harm. The National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Improving Support for At Risk Participants) Bill 2021 implements key recommendations following an independent review into the adequacy of the regulation of the supports provided to 54-year-old Adelaide woman Ann-Marie Smith, who, sadly, died last year. The bill provides for a more streamlined information-sharing process between the National Disability Insurance Agency and the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and recognises the need for a balance between the necessity of an efficient information-sharing mechanism and the importance of privacy protection. Our government is listening to participants, families, service providers and the community at large in relation to future reforms aimed at improving the NDIS participant's experience. We are building a new participant service guarantee through amendments to the NDIS Act. These changes build on recommendations from the 2019 Tune review into the NDIS Act. The Tune review was underpinned by an extensive consultation process in 2019, and there has been broad support for implementing these measures. We have completed further public consultation on our draft legislation for the participant service guarantee and other measures bill. The participant service guarantee sets out clear time frames for NDIS processes, giving participants, families and carers greater certainty about how long NDIS processes will take. The guarantee will set new standards for the time it takes for key steps in the NDIS process and applies service standards to the National Disability Insurance Agency. These positive changes will support over 210 NDIS service providers in my electorate of Mallee, including Sunraysia Residential Services. SRS has been in operation for 43 years and provides residential and wraparound support to people who live with a disability. SRS focuses on person centred support and is embedded with creative ideas that assist people with disabilities to reach their desired goals. They also have a commercial enterprise, Benetook Farm, which produces eggs to sell to local businesses around the district. At the end of the last year I had the pleasure of attending the grand opening of their new general store at the farm. The farm and general store have provided a place for SRS participants to learn new skills and socialise with friends, as well as a place to connect with the wider community and those who need support. We are also investing in our regional capacity through the Building Better Regions Fund. Last month, I was pleased to announce $4.9 million for Mallee Family Care for the construction of new office space and community space. This investment will help MFC to improve and expand their vital services in the region. They offer families financial and legal services and they are also an NDIS provider. They service a very large catchment, from Birchip to Swan Hill and Mildura and over the border to Dareton and Wentworth. Our government's investment is going to make a difference to the lives of thousands of people. I was very proud to announce this funding with the CEO of Mallee Family Care, Teresa Jayet. I know that NDIS participants and providers are eager to see that the scheme is improved. We are taking action for the benefit of regional Australians. I understand that the NDIS has been transformative for many people living with a disability in my electorate, and I am thankful that I am able to support measures that will ensure the sustainability of the program for years to come. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265979 Is the motion seconded? Mr Alexander M3M I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. 17:31 Mr DICK 53517 Oxley I want to enter today's debate to place on record the appalling nature of this government handling of the NDIS and its workforce. I know the member for Mallee was put up to this by the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and Minister for Government Services, who is trying to get a pat on the back for the government. But the government seem to live in this Orwellian world where they say black is white and night is day. Are you kidding me? The member previous to me said that we know that the system needs some improvement. If that's not the biggest understatement in the history of the world then I'm not here. This is the member for Mallee who belled the cat about the better regions program, which she spoke about. You've got to get on the green spreadsheet, not the pink spreadsheet. No-one else got that memo. I'm not sure about anyone else in the chamber. Did anyone on this side get that memo about how to get on the approval list? I didn't. I didn't even know about it. Get real, members of the government. I want to talk about workforce participation when it comes to vaccinations and the NDIS. We know that the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of people with Disability released the draft commissioners' report into the vaccine rollout. How did the government track workforce participation and people in the NDIS when it came to so-called improvements? It highlighted the clear failures of the government to vaccinate Australians living with a disability. In their scathing report, the royal commission found that the federal Department of Health's approach to vaccinating people with disabilities had been seriously deficient. People with disability living in shared accommodation or group homes were originally included in phase 1a of the vaccine rollout, but they were quietly bumped down the queue. Who can forget the Minister for Health talking over and over again about 17 per cent of 64 per cent of four per cent of nine per cent? You didn't meet any of your targets when it came to the NDIS—it is appalling—so let's not have any lectures about how we need to tweak it here and tweak it there. It is a system of this government that is under complete collapse. They are praising themselves that they're running good workforce participation with the NDIS. Are you kidding me? I bet you that anyone who comes into the office of the member for Moncrieff or the office of the member for Bennelong doesn't line up and say, 'We love the NDIS. There's nothing else to do.' No, they would have the same line-ups that we do. They would have the same frustrations of parents and carers, over and over again: they can't navigate the system; they can't get the system; they don't have the workers to look after their loved ones. I want to touch on something that the government doesn't talk about with the NDIS, and that's special schools. I want to paint a picture of the pattern of neglect by this government. It undermines the NDIS, making it harder and harder for people to access the system, so they eventually get off it. There is no support for the workforce from this government. I recently met with Goodna Special School in my electorate. They wrote to me outlining their concerns about the NDIS workforce and the impact on their students. Goodna Special School has approximately 190 students, each of them with a severe intellectual disability, many with comorbid conditions and physical disability. Many of their students come from a background of socioeconomic disadvantage, and the school has rightly identified that its students and families could benefit greatly from access to the NDIS and from having more support staff from the NDIS. The school identified many barriers faced by families. The first of these is awareness. Of the families that the school identified would benefit from the scheme, many were not aware of how to access it or had tried to access the scheme and found the process complicated, confusing and distressing. This has led to many families abandoning the application process and giving up. That's exactly what this government wants—to undermine the system and push people out of the system. Those opposite have never supported the NDIS. It was a Labor initiative, and they've only gone along with it reluctantly. They were held over the barrel by the shadow minister when it came to reviewing the plans. They had to back away from that. The second barrier is utilisation. Families of children who have been approved have not been able to properly utilise their plans, resulting in the plan being cut. They get approved for accessible services but can't find people to provide them, so the government then cuts those services, saying, 'We're not going to roll those services over, because you didn't use them.' Once again, the families have one hand tied behind their back. I believe this government is making it as difficult as possible to access the NDIS. Families who already face social disadvantage, compounded by the challenges of raising a child with disability, are presented with a confusing and convoluted system and are expected to navigate it almost completely without assistance. This government needs to pick up its game, make our NDIS system more accessible and ensure that Australians with disability have the opportunities to get vaccinated, keep themselves and our communities safe and have better support from the workforce itself. 17:36 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Our government stands behind the National Disability Insurance Scheme, and we stand behind those who need help and support to live with a disability. We are committed to ensuring that there is a strong, skilled and sustainable workforce, having launched the NDIS National Workforce Plan in June this year. A total of 530,000 participants will be supported by the NDIS when it reaches full maturity in the next few years, and the current workforce of 270,000, including in-home and in-community support workers, allied health professionals, managers and other professionals, will require an additional 83,000 workers to join them by the end of June 2024. That's a lot. This growing sector and workforce will also support veterans and aged care. Disability support, aged-care and veterans' care programs are highly connected, if you consider that 30 per cent of aged-care providers also operate in the NDIS or veterans' care programs and 36 per cent of veterans' care providers operate across all three areas. So it makes sense that the workforce plan applies across these three sectors. Given our skill shortage at present, our clear plan is to attract workers with suitable skills, values and attributes and to improve existing workers' access to training and development opportunities. There are many opportunities for employment within the NDIS workforce, including personalised supports of varying complexity and intensity, social and community participation support, transportation and cleaning. Of course, the attributes of personal carers in the way they approach their responsibility of care is very important to those who receive that care, and recipients in Moncrieff tell me that it's more important to them than a qualification. Consequently, embedded in training will be the standard for attitudes, behaviours, skills and knowledge, as established by the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission's Workforce Capability Framework. Through updates to nationally recognised training programs, the plan will support skills needs and career pathways in the NDIS as well as the broader care and support sector. This will include the development of microcredentials to allow workers to quickly upskill, while also providing pathways towards recognised qualifications, where appropriate for their role. The development of a skills passport will also strengthen the recognition of training in the sector by recording and verifying qualifications, screening checks and references for individual workers. This will protect participants receiving care and minimise harm to the most vulnerable. The aged-care legislation has indeed been changed, to recognise NDIS worker screening clearances. This makes it easier for aged-care providers and workers—staff and volunteers—who support NDIS participants and other in-care situations. I spoke to that legislation in the House just recently, and we heard about tighter controls on screening for carers that will benefit those who are vulnerable to abuse. In terms of attracting workers, we're creating sources of information and tools for people to understand the benefits and opportunities of working in the care and support sector. We're developing a simple and accessible online tool for jobseekers to self-assess suitability for new roles in the sector. We're working on a range of approaches, including a website and a campaign where people can find out more about the care and support sector and what is involved. We will improve the effectiveness of job boards to match jobseekers to vacancies in the sector. We're also working with other agencies to ensure that the care and support sector is included as a priority in current workforce and training initiatives. In addition to the NDIS workforce plan, measures that are already in place are the Economic Recovery Plan for Australia, the JobMaker plan and the JobTrainer fund that will assist in building workforce for the sector. Further to those measures is the 2021-22 budget investment of $12.3 million in the care and support workforce package over the next two years to cut red tape and to promote regulatory alignment across the aged-care, disability and veterans care sector. A Life Changing Life is the campaign that I mentioned. It's an NDIS worker campaign. It's about healthcare workers who are changing the lives of Australians who need that extra care. This plan complements the other Australian government reforms that I've outlined to build a simpler, fairer, faster and more flexible NDIS. Most importantly, NDIS participants will have access to higher-quality supports, improved service continuity and a workforce that reflects the diversity of the NDIS participants. 17:42 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley I would like to thank the member for Mallee for tabling this motion to recognise the important and valuable work of our disability support carers. Care work is extremely important to our society and to the economy, but it is often undervalued and looked over. Paid care is worth around $112.4 billion to the Australian economy. It makes up almost nine per cent of our GDP. Unpaid care is estimated to be worth over $650 billion. Yet the average pay for a disability support worker, who is more than likely to be a woman, is around $30 an hour before tax. That is not good enough for the physically and emotionally intensive work that our carers do. That is why an Albanese Labor government will strengthen the ability and capacity of the Fair Work Commission to order pay increases for workers in low-paid female-dominated industries like disability care, aged care and child care. For the past eight years, NDIS participants in my electorate of Lilley have felt ignored and passed over by the coalition government, who operate the disability service that they are supposed to be the beneficiaries of. They feel scared that the support network that they rely on to get everyday services will be subject to budget cuts and outsourcing—and with good reason. In 2019 the Morrison government ripped $4.6 billion away from the NDIS. Earlier this year the Morrison government's secretive and disingenuous consultation on independent assessment led to significant mistrust of any proposed changes to the NDIS Act. While the plan to bring in independent assessments was scrapped after a successful campaign led by Labor and disability advocates together, NDIS participants know that they cannot trust the Morrison government to protect and uphold the NDIS if they are re-elected for a fourth term. I believe that as members of parliament it is our duty to be the voice for those who find it hardest to get here and people who feel downtrodden by our political system. Today I will use my remaining time in this place to give voice to Eva, a brave Lilley local who wrote to me and asked me to share her story with our parliament. 'It is well past midnight, and I am using my old mobile phone to write to you through my very blurry vision and with my right hand tremors. I used to be a university academic for 12 years with an illustrious international career. In December 2020, I was diagnosed with MECFS. At the same time, I was diagnosed with dysautonomia and POTS. I also suffer from severe chronic fibromyalgia. The MECFS is so debilitating that some days I barely have the energy to breathe, or utter words out loud, or chew food, or brush my hair or wash myself. I have inflammation of the brain and spinal fluid affecting my cognition, and my sensory overload is so severe that I become almost hysterical when exposed to bright lights, any sounds or any smells. I am also the sole carer of my 27-year-old son, who has the same condition plus several others. There's not an able-bodied person in our household, and we cannot readily leave home due to having to navigate 48 stairs down and 48 stairs back up even to go to medical appointments. I use disability aids to move around my apartment when I'm not bedridden, which I am about 80 per cent of the time. 'What the government is doing with NDIS now is creating enormous stress to already very weak and fragile sufferers of both visible and invisible illnesses. I have contacted twice my local community services for help. But at 50 years of age I am too young to be assisted, they tell me. I fall through the cracks of a broken system. NDIS is, or perhaps now was, my only hope, but I'm terrified of not being believed, not being supported and not being assessed by highly qualified and compassionate assessors. I sincerely hope that my story is read out in parliament and destroys some prevailing stereotypes of what disability is, who the disabled are, and highlights the daily suffering and lack of support for the 250,000 Australians who suffer MECFS and are missing from life, and deserve to be treated with utmost dignity and empathetic support, rather than being put through the proverbial wringer until we can breathe no more.' 17:47 Mr ALEXANDER M3M Bennelong I would like to thank the member for Mallee for bringing forward this important motion. The NDIS has been a critical pillar of our social security ever since it was created. But, in the last two years as the pandemic has ravaged our communities, the workers at the NDIS have held a special place in our communities. In this time they have had to juggle the huge responsibilities of caring for some of the most vulnerable in the community while knowing that they themselves were the main conduit to the outside world for many of these people. This emotional strain must have been huge, but these workers have stepped up and, through a combination of vaccinations, rigorous health standards and their ongoing commitment, they have kept our vulnerable people safe under incredibly difficult conditions. We have a large number of NDIS workers based in Bennelong, and all do incredible work. I've had the pleasure of working with some through groups like RASAID and my ongoing involvement with Achieve Australia, who are based in Bennelong. I was delighted to work hard with Achieve and Royal Rehab, our incredible rehabilitation hospital in Putney, to ensure that their clients, residents and workers were all vaccinated quickly after initial delays. All these workers deserve our praise and support for their efforts over this pandemic and into the future. While the coming months will see a return to normal for most of us, carers and NDIS workers will still be working in one of the more demanding jobs, which is why it's so pleasing to see the Australian government is committed to delivering on the NDIS, and that includes ensuring there is a strong and sustainable workforce to support it. Back in June we launched the NDIS National Workforce Plan. It's designed to attract workers with suitable skills, values and attributes, while also improving existing workers' access to training and development opportunities. We believe that 530,000 participants will be supported by the NDIS when it reaches full maturity in the next few years, with an additional 83,000 workers needed to support them. These 83,000 people are the very same that this motion points out will be needed to strengthen the capabilities of the NDIS workforce. It is clear that the government has taken note of the NDIS data and has planned accordingly to meet the growing need. These new roles will be needed across all sectors that the NDIS operates in and will include in-home and in-community support workers, allied health professionals and also managers and other professionals. The initiatives in this workforce plan will support quality and growth not only in the disability sector but also in aged care and support for our veterans. The care and support sector is one of the largest and fastest-growing sectors in Australia. By 2024, the disability and aged-care sectors are predicted to grow by 31 and 20 per cent respectively. This plan complements other Australian governments' reforms to build a simpler, fairer, faster and more flexible NDIS. Workers will benefit from improved training, aligned registration requirements and greater access to professional development opportunities. Providers will benefit from better regulation across the sector and more market demand information to drive innovation and enable a flexible workforce to meet the needs of our participants. Importantly, NDIS participants will have access to higher quality supports, improved service continuity and a workforce that reflects the diversity of NDIS participants. We must always remember that participants are at the centre of the NDIS and every reform is designed to improve their experience. I am glad that the government has strengthened its commitment to the workers of the NDIS, because, through supporting them, we are supporting all NDIS participants and ensuring that many of the most vulnerable people in our community have the support they need to live and thrive. 17:51 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser The motion that we are discussing today is a very important one, and, indeed, it contains a kernel that I am willing to agree with, which is the acknowledgement in the motion that the disability workforce will require an additional 83,000 workers over the next few years to strengthen its responsiveness, quality and capability. But what I can't agree with is the implication and, indeed, the statement in this motion that the government is doing anywhere near enough to deal with this workforce crisis. I'm going to make a couple of major points today. The first is that this is a workforce crisis that has been evolving over a long period of time and that is not receiving sufficient attention or funding. Let's look at the workforce crisis that the NDIS is currently facing. This, of course, is a slowly evolving challenge in the workforce; it's not something that has arisen overnight and it's not something we're going to be able to solve by turning on a tap. The government has been in power for more than eight years. So there's something almost brazen about a motion of this nature, where it says that we face a shortfall of 83,000 workers in just a few years, as if this has come out of the blue or as if this is something that the government has just read in some report that has landed on its desk, when in fact this is a workforce crisis that has been evolving for year after year under its watch. This makes it all the more an indictment on the way in which they have managed and funded this scheme. Let's look at this workforce challenge within the broader context of skills within our workforce. As the shadow minister for skills has pointed out, there are 150,000 fewer apprentices today than when this government came to office. We've seen billions ripped out of the TAFE system. We see a number of employers today saying it's hard to find skilled staff. In the context of the NDIS in particular, we see that working conditions in many areas have deteriorated. There are currently 3,175 unfilled job vacancies. So, yes, it is true that, by 2024, an additional 83,000 workers will be required. But, again, this has evolved over many years under this government, and for this motion to be put forward as some kind of challenge which a $12.3 million investment in some kind of workforce package is going to deal with is, frankly, utterly ridiculous. The second point I want to make is that the implication of this motion is that these extra workers are going to somehow complement other policies that this government has in place to improve the effectiveness of the NDIS when, in fact, what we have seen over recent years from this government is, I believe, a fundamental weakening of many key aspects of the NDIS. Let's look at the independent assessment pile, something that is paused but is certainly not, in my opinion, totally off the agenda. At best, the move towards independent assessments was wasteful and potentially contained unintended consequences. At worst, it was cruel and confusing. It was not surprisingly greeted with great dismay by the sector. The minister at the time said that there was too much natural empathy on the part of some public servants and that this was leading to gargantuan cost blowouts. Indeed, the government almost leaped massive projections of cost blowouts well into the future. A division having been called in the House of Representatives— Sitting suspended from 17:55 to 18:05 Dr MULINO 132880 Understandably, independent assessments were greeted with great dismay and confusion by the sector. Indeed, independent assessments were accompanied by a somewhat secretive Sustainability Action Taskforce. This somewhat secretive cost-cutting was like some kind of Orwellian exercise or something out of Utopia. You can imagine people in the sector hearing about the Sustainability Action Taskforce and thinking to themselves, 'Why don't you just tell us you're going to cut the level of our benefits?' Let's look at a number of experts who have examined what's actually going on. There was a recent examination of remuneration in the sector by the University of Melbourne, which found that 20 per cent of disability support workers could not pay their bills, their mortgage or their rent. There have been government claims that overspending is rife. In reality, costs have increased by 18 per cent in the 12 months to 21 July, whereas the number of NDIS participants grew by 20.5 per cent, so there has been a reduction in per capita expenditure. The fundamental point is that we are experiencing a workforce challenge but it's one that has been evolving for many years, one that was foreseeable and avoidable. It's an indictment of this government, which has been in power for eight long years. 18:06 Mr DRUM 56430 Nicholls The opportunity to talk about the NDIS is always a great opportunity for those in the coalition, as members of the government responsibility for bring it to fruition—an incredible responsibility. This is a life-changing program for many, many families and many, many Australians with disabilities, enabling them to have greater fulfilment in their endeavours and a greater chance of reaching their full potential. This is a program that really has had a life-changing impact on thousands and thousands of Australians. Yes, it has had many issues. We've had people given very poor plans. I believe that in the early stages of this program the planning quality wasn't up to speed; therefore families had to go back and appeal that they hadn't received an adequate plan compared with the program they'd been on under the old state model. But as the scheme has evolved we have continued to hone the individual cases within the NDIS, and we now have a program that over 530,000 participants are taking advantage of. The other component to the NDIS is the impact it has had on the workforce in aged care. This new industry, the caring industry, has jumped up in Australia with such prominence that we now have a situation where the NDIS, in quite a few cases, is competing against aged care for workforce. We therefore have to look at that. One thing the coalition can be very proud of is that we have funded the NDIS. I know the Labor Party like to say it was already funded, but it wasn't. We had to find many additional billions of dollars to get the NDIS funded. It is now funded, albeit there is always an incredible need to put more and more money into the NDIS. Between now and 2024, the aged-care sector and the disability sector will grow by 31 per cent and 20 per cent. That is going to be an incredible impost on the finances of this nation. But the coalition government are confident, having funded this scheme to date, that we are going to fund it into the future. The National Disability Insurance Scheme should make every Australian incredibly proud. When I was a young kid, families that had children with disabilities were, effectively, given the role of raising that child, whether the child had profound or mild disabilities. That responsibility tended to fall nearly solely to the household. The state has now, effectively, taken full responsibility for the care, the upkeep and the support of children who are born with disabilities. We will see this program give our participants even higher quality support, in terms of the different ways that we can assist and help. It's going to see an improved level of service. We believe it's going to give us a workforce that reflects the diversity of the NDIS participants—something that will be needed on an ongoing basis. Because the needs of participants within the NDIS are so wide and varied, the skills of the workforce will have to be able to match those needs. That's why we're also improving the entry-level pathway and providing greater opportunity for training and development. This offers a fantastic option for students who are studying as well as those working within the NDIS system. It gives them an 'in' to discover: what is a career in this care sector really like? Many students are then taking the opportunity to put further qualifications around their skill set so that they can make this their career. 18:11 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I rise to speak on the motion put forward by my friend and colleague the member for Mallee. She and I have worked on a number of health issues since she's been in parliament. In particular, we are the co-chairs of the parliamentary friends of organ donation and she has earned my respect for the very excellent work she's done in her advocacy on this issue. She's also been a strong supporter of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, of course, and I thank her for bringing this important matter before the House. The NDIS will undoubtedly go down in history as one of the greatest legacies of the Gillard Labor government, and there is no question that Julia Gillard deserves enormous credit for her fight for, and the ultimate delivery of, the NDIS. It's a scheme that we must defend, preserve and strengthen at all costs. It has made a remarkable difference to the people that I've looked after in the last 40 years. However, under the last eight years of the coalition government, the NDIS has, unfortunately, not received the steadfast support that many in the coalition promised. That may be through mismanagement, it may be through a lack of understanding or, importantly, it may be because of a lack of empathy. The effectiveness of the NDIS has at times been diluted by the Morrison government and its ministers. Let me talk about the independent assessors. The Morrison government said that the independent assessors were a result of intensive and extensive community consultation. That's a load of absolute hogwash. No-one in the disability sector believed that independent assessors were the way to go to provide better NDIS support for the people they care for. This was thought up by the previous minister, Minister Robert, to try and delay the implementation of the scheme, I believe, for many people. It was a terrible, terrible idea. It had no community support, and, begrudgingly, it has been abandoned by the new minister. Thank God for that. Support for the NDIS ought to be bipartisan, and I know there are many on the government side who do support it and support it well, the member for Mallee being one of them. But, as we've already heard from the previous speaker, there have been lots of problems that have not been adequately addressed even now, and the workforce issues are certainly part of that. The battles need to be fought: that's true. But these battles ought not to be had in the first place in many instances. So profound was the impact of the NDIS that many of my patients and their families saw it as being life changing. For the very first time, we had a national government that was saying to Australians living with a disability and their loved ones that they were not in this alone; that it was a responsibility of all of us, as a society, to make sure that people with a disability had the quality of life of any other Australian and the ability to progress in life as well as any other Australian; and that support would be available to all who needed it. Every Australian is entitled to a high quality of living and the right to live independent and fulfilling lives. I've certainly seen many examples of this. Recently, I visited a group home in my electorate, in Macarthur, run by DPN Casa Capace. It's absolutely magnificent. It allows people, adults with disability, to fulfil the lives they want to live, independently. It does require worker support, and those workers need to be highly trained because of the amount of technology and the amount of support these residents require, but they will get that thanks to the NDIS. There have been issues in the rollout, I don't deny it, and the workforce issues have to be ironed out. We must have, on the government side, people who are prepared, without question, to defend the NDIS. The NDIS has always been funded, and we must make sure we keep that funding, to the best of our ability, to provide for people who have severe disabilities. We must strengthen our capacity, we must strengthen our workforce and we must, above all, make sure that everyone in our society is valued and everyone in our society can live their lives as independently as they can. They're not easy things to do. I have seen many people with severe disability, and I admire the work of many of the specialist schools. Mary Brooksbank specialist school, Passfield Park, Beverley Park, Mater Dei—all the specialist schools and specialist support agencies, I admire them enormously. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Dementia 173 18:16 Mr GORMAN ( 74519 Perth ) ( ): I move: That this House notes that: (1) dementia is the leading cause of death of women in Australia; (2) over 42,000 Western Australians are living with dementia and some 242 new diagnoses are made each day; (3) 472,000 Australians live with dementia and almost 1.6 million people are involved in their care; (4) it is expected that the number of people living with dementia in Australia is likely to increase to over 1 million by 2058; (5) we all have a role to play in building dementia-friendly communities such as the initiative of the Memory Cafe in Cambridge; (6) Western Australians are fortunate to be served by Alzheimer's WA which was founded 40 years ago in Inglewood and has just opened their new base in Subiaco; and (7) the 42,000 Western Australians suffering from dementia deserve local, well-funded care, support and research. Dementia is a truly awful disease where you watch family members forget other family members, forget faces they once recognised and eventually forget who they are themselves. Like many in this place, I've had the experience of seeing members of my family being eaten away by this disease, which currently has no cure. My great-grandmother, who lived with us for many years in Fremantle when I was growing up as a kid, started to show early signs and was eventually moved into a nursing home, which, thankfully, was just around the corner from us. But watching her go through that awful experience, her fears and worries amplified as her personality was slowly sanded away, was just truly awful, and it's awful for any family member who has to watch that happen to someone they love. I'm proud to be moving this motion in coordination with the member for Curtin. We were at the Alzheimer's WA launch of their new offices in Subiaco. I think it was the member for Curtin's idea that we should try to amplify the message from that event by moving this motion. Normally I would have thought it was too kind a bipartisan motion to get much attention in this place, but it speaks to the great people on the selection panel that we are debating it here this evening, and I thank them all. If there's one message I'd like people to take away from the motion, if there's one message I'd like to send from this motion, it's this: early intervention is vital in the fight against dementia. Currently there is no known cure, but what we can do now, in our lives today, are things that we know can minimise the risk of dementia down the track. Regular exercise, keeping mentally stimulated, eating healthy, drinking less alcohol, maintaining social lives, maintaining a healthy weight, quitting smoking—good advice generally; good advice if you want to avoid the awful impacts of dementia. Not that, if you do any of these things, you're guaranteed not affected by it. It's probably also good advice for all of us in this place regardless. If we take the steps where we can, we're not just looking after ourselves, we're looking after our loved ones. We know when someone suffers from dementia, it's not just them who suffers, it's their family who suffer too. It's estimated that up to 337,000 Australians provide unpaid care for someone living with dementia in Australia. One in three of these people reduce their working hours so that they can provide unpaid care. We know this is something that disproportionately affects women. Three in four primary carers of people with dementia are women So, again, when we think about what we will be able to do to cure this disease and prevent people being affected by it, we'll also be taking a small step towards reducing that burden on so many families. I would like to make special mention of the chair of Alzheimer's WA, Adjunct Professor Warren Harding , who is a very proud and active advocate and a g reat constituent of the Curtin electorate. I 'll quote something he said, which I think sums up what needs to be done as we tackle this policy challenge: ' Every Australian has the human right to age with dignity in place , where their children work and their grandchildren go to school, and live as they choose in safe , dementia - friendly communities , with access to affordable, high - quality and safe aged - care services. ' I want to thank Warren and his team for their research and advocacy work and for the meaningful difference it makes to the lives of people in Western Australia every day. Alzheimer's WA was established in 1982 — I understand it was established in Inglewood in the Perth electorate —a nd over the last almost 40 years it has continued to help carers and people who are living with this disease. Over time they have become a leader not just in WA but also across Australia. T heir work also provides important , essential jobs , some 180 permanent, part-time and casual roles , in three facilities across the metropolitan area. They also offer certificate III and certificate I V education consulting services for other providers. If we look at what the future holds, it's worth reflecting on the fact that the number of older Australians is set to double over the next 40 years and that that is going to put huge pressure on our economy . We have to make sure we have the skills and the people able to care for not just this generation but also the next generation . The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 Is the motion seconded ? 18:22 Ms HAMMOND 80072 Curtin I second the motion. I thank the member for Perth for moving this motion and for the words that he just said. To quote him: dementia is truly awful. As he said, it eats away at a person. It eats away at them mentally and physically and it eats away at their personality. Dementia is not one specific disease. Rather it's a term which describes a collection of symptoms of a larger group of illnesses. These illnesses cause a progressive decline in a person's functioning, including a loss of memory, confusion, personality change and withdrawal. One of the most common types of dementia is Alzheimer's disease. Unfortunately, there is currently no prevention or cure for most forms of dementia. While we must absolutely prioritise research efforts into dementia, in the absence of a major breakthrough at this point in time, we must ensure that we provide a supportive and loving environment for those who suffer from dementia and for those who care for people who suffer from dementia. The importance of this can't be overstated. The facts about the incidence and impact of dementia are stark. Dementia is the leading cause of death in women in Australia and the second leading cause of death of all Australians. It is expected to overtake heart disease to become the leading cause of death in coming years. In WA over 42,000 Western Australians live with dementia, and over 240 new diagnoses are made each day. Nationally dementia impacts 472,000 Australians, and there are almost 1.6 million people involved in their care. The 2021 Intergenerational report highlighted that the prevalence of dementia is expected to continue to rise as a result of Australia's ageing population over the next 40 years and that without a medical breakthrough the number of people living with dementia is expected to increase to over one million by 2058. With approximately 70 per cent of people with dementia living in the community, the need to prepare our communities for an ever-increasing older population , both socially and physically , has never been greater . C ommunities that embrace our demographic shift stand to gain not only from greater social cohesion but also economically, through earlier diagnoses and people living more actively within their communities. There is no one-size-fits all model for creating a dementia-friendly community. It's something that needs to be developed locally, to meet local needs, and in a local context. And everyone has a role to play in creating dementia-friendly communities, a place where those living with dementia are supported to experience a life of meaning, purpose and value and where the accessibility of the physical environment supports people living with dementia to remain engaged, included and connected. There are many stories and examples of innovative practice in dementia prevention and dementia care. To highlight one example, something that happens in WA is the Forget-Me-Not cafes, a great initiative where people can come together to support those with dementia and their carers. The cafes provide a safe place for people to visit, socialise and interact with others. During a conversation I had with the chair of Alzheimer's WA, Professor Warren Harding, I provided my support for a memory cafe at Floreat Forum, in my electorate of Curtin. Also, after collaborating with Alzheimer's WA and with the town of Cambridge, we launched the Cambridge memory cafe earlier this year, and it's been a great success. It provides an opportunity for people living with dementia to maintain their community connections and helps to address some of the challenges they face, such as lack of access to safe social activities. Further, the memory cafe in Floreat Forum has raised awareness and understanding among local business operators and visitors to the forum about how we can all better connect with people who are living with dementia in our local community. By way of finishing, and to reiterate what the member for Perth has said, I will say that Western Australians are so fortunate to be served by Alzheimer's WA. Alzheimer's WA is the leading voice for people living with dementia in WA. For nearly 40 years it has provided a range of support, education and consultancy services to assist people who are living with dementia, as well as their families and carers. With the member for Perth, I went to the opening of their new premises in my electorate—they moved from his electorate to mine; it's not a judgement on him, but they have moved into my electorate!—and we were both there to welcome them and to celebrate their new premises. I want to express my congratulations to all involved in this amazing organisation. Thank you very much. 18:27 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I'd like to thank the member for Perth and the member for Curtin for bringing this motion on this very important matter, dementia, before the House. Australia has an ageing population, and there are about half a million people in Australia with dementia, and that's expected to increase pretty markedly over the next decade. It is also one of the most common causes of death, being the commonest cause in females and second most common in males. As the member for Perth has noted, as the number of people with dementia increases the call on services is expected to rise accordingly. According to Dementia Australia, 1.6 million Australians are involved in the care of people living with dementia. While the disease can occur in anybody, it is of course more common in those over 65 years of age. This tragic syndrome affects so many Australians directly and indirectly. It will continue to be a real drain on our productivity unless we can get the management right. People with dementia don't do very well in different surroundings. They really like to be in familiar surroundings. Therefore it's very important that we keep people with dementia at home. If we are going to do that, we need to make sure our workforce is dementia trained and properly skilled. Secondly, we need to put in place services that support people with dementia in ways that are perhaps secondary to what people might imagine. As they age, people with dementia can have things like hearing loss, visual impairment and continence difficulties. Unless we address those issues, their lives will be made much more difficult, and it will be much more difficult for their carers and much more difficult to support them, particularly in aged-care surroundings. So we must make sure that people, as they age, and particularly those with dementia, have access to services. My personal view is that people over the age of 65 should be eligible for the NDIS. I think that that is something that would make a huge difference in our management of people with dementia. Secondly, we must make sure that our respite services are able to provide carers with support and enough respite to enable them to continue to care for their loved ones with dementia in their own homes or in familiar surroundings. The number of people living with dementia is obviously much higher in cities, and it's easier to provide services in large population areas, but we must also think of those with dementia who live in rural, regional and remote areas. We must provide services for them in rural and remote areas. We must make sure that those who are receiving home care for dementia are provided with the services that they need to maintain good health. I certainly agreed with the member for Perth when he said that we should be doing much more to foster dementia-friendly communities. It's in the interests of all of us, both socially and economically, to do so. I looked into the Memory Cafe that the member for Perth mentioned. I think that sounds like a really terrific idea. It's something that we should be supporting around the country. I'd like to thank those in my own community of Macarthur who are providing terrific services for those with dementia—organisations such as Meals on Wheels, Myrtle Cottage and Macarthur Disability Services. I would like to acknowledge their work and their support for people with dementia living in my electorate. As the member for Curtin mentioned, dementia has not just one cause. There are over 100 different causes of dementia. The most familiar, of course, is Alzheimer's disease, but it can be caused by a variety of other conditions. Early diagnosis is key, and access to early diagnosis and proper aged-care plans are very important to the family of a loved one who has dementia. We must get this right, and we must get better at recognising early dementia and providing services for people with early onset dementia. It can be a difficult thing to do, and loved ones often face resistance from the person in care to the diagnosis of dementia, but we need to support all those involved in care and providing support, from our GPs to our community nurses and support organisations. The National Dementia Helpline is a great point of contact for those facing these difficulties. I thank the members for bringing this very important matter to the House. 18:32 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner I rise tonight to speak about one of the nation's greatest health challenges. Dementia is the second leading cause of death in Australia and the No. 1 cause of death for women. Almost half a million people are currently living with dementia in Australia, with this number expected to reach around 1.1 million in less than 30 years. I'm proud of the funding our government is investing into dementia services to support those living with this condition and their carers. We have a range of government-funded dementia services, including Dementia Australia, which delivers the National Dementia Support Program and the National Dementia Helpline. These services offer life-changing support, most notably aiding carers when behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia are affecting a person's care or quality of life. Carers can go through many emotions, from joy to grief, and financial pressure. It is of the utmost importance that our government know that these carers are not alone. The National Dementia Helpline provides free support and advice for carers on how they can look after themselves and on the services that are available to them. As part of this year's budget, we made an extraordinary commitment to dementia, investing over $229 million. Some of the key measures of this investment include enhanced support for people living with dementia, additional outreach capability for the National Dementia Helpline and dementia training throughout the sector. In my electorate of Bonner, I am seeing the benefits of our ongoing investment firsthand. As part of our government's $185 million Dementia, Ageing and Aged Care Mission from 2018 to 2029, the first recipient of this mission, with $10 million for dementia research, was the Clem Jones Centre for Ageing Dementia Research at the Queensland Brain Institute. I had the privilege of being invited to the centre with the minister for health, Greg Hunt, to see the groundbreaking research being undertaken and I congratulated the team on being awarded the single largest boost in health and medical research funding in Australia's history. The researchers could not have been more grateful for our government's continued support and funding. I invited local dementia advocates from Bonner to join me on a tour of the research facility and attend a presentation at the QBI's world-class research facility. The tour examined the different technologies and the new methods being used and developed to ensure that all Australians have a better quality of life. I also want to take this opportunity to shine a light on two amazing dementia advocates in my electorate, John Quinn and his partner Glenys Petrie. In 2014 John and Glenys started the Brisbane South-East Dementia Alliance. From this, their work has extended across our community and beyond. John lives with dementia and shares his personal testimony to raise awareness. To say that they have both been heavily involved in our community is an understatement. Glenys had a vision for John to live well and to be supported in the community, and she has dedicated her time to breaking the stigma and changing the mindset about people living with this condition. She has organised regular community forums and even an international dementia conference in Bonner. Glenys has also maintained the Remember Me friendship group which meets monthly to enable people with dementia, their carers and family members to get together socially. It goes to show that providing safe and inclusive spaces where connections can be made really does make all the difference. Most recently, Glenys and John have been working with the year 12 students at Bonner's Iona College to deliver a dementia awareness program. Glenys and John refer to these students as 'the change agents of the future'. Iona College is the first school in Australia to work towards becoming a dementia-friendly school. This month the Brisbane South-East Dementia Alliance launched the Creating Change: Activating a Dementia-Friendly Brisbane forum, which took place at the college. It saw Brisbane residents and businesses come together to support and empower people with dementia to live well. Glenys is well and truly making strides towards her vision that, by the time Brisbane hosts the 2032 Olympics, we will be recognised as a dementia-inclusive city. Currently, Brisbane is the only capital city in Australia that has committed to this recognition, and it would not have been possible without the efforts of John and Glenys. 18:37 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle I am very pleased to speak on this motion moved today by my friend and colleague the member for Perth, because there has never been a more critical time to address the issue of dementia in Australia. In 2021 there are an estimated 472,000 Australians living with dementia. Without a medical breakthrough, the number of people with dementia is expected to increase by almost 1.1 million by 2058. Dementia is a terminal condition, and there is still no cure. It continues to be the leading cause of death of women in Australia and the second-leading cause of death in this country overall, and it is predicted to become the leading cause of death within the next five years. It is estimated that today almost 1.6 million people in Australia are involved in the care of someone living with dementia. We know that approximately 70 per cent of people with dementia are living at home in the community, so ensuring our communities are dementia-friendly and inclusive makes very good sense and should be a high priority for local, state and federal governments throughout Australia. While health, aged-care and disability sector reforms over recent years have been vital to better supporting people with dementia, we know from what individuals impacted by dementia tell us that there is still a long way to go before we can address and, indeed, prevent discrimination, stigma and misunderstanding of dementia in our communities. My father was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease, the most common form of dementia, almost two years ago. He continues to live an active and fulfilling life, thanks in large part to my remarkable mother, a strong family support network, a terrific team of carers, and some truly wonderful people and resources in our local community. All of us have a role to play in supporting him, allowing him to continue the many activities he enjoys, including a daily walk to the newsagent to get his beloved Newcastle Herald. I've learnt a lot about how a little bit of support can go a long way to helping maintain a person's dignity and community involvement. My father is an extraordinary person. He inspires me every day. He's always been a leader, he's always put himself forward, and he's always mindful of others around him. When I told him I was going to join my colleague and friend, the member for Dobell, who joins me in the chamber today to honour her father's passing in the 2021 Grant McBride Memory Walk and Jog, my dad was the first person to put up his hand and say that he wanted to walk with me. He knew the value of raising awareness and funds around dementia research. I really want to thank those extraordinary researchers in my community at the University of Newcastle and the Hunter Medical Research Institute who continue to do groundbreaking research around the early detection of dementia and potential treatments. But, of course, diagnosis comes with its own set of difficulties if you don't know how to access support and you don't have that readily available in your community. That is why I give an enormous vote of thanks to local communities like Newcastle, who play an integral role in supporting dementia inclusion both in the built environment and in the forms of activities in our communities. I want to acknowledge the role of the Hunter Dementia and Memory Resource Centre in Hamilton that founded the remarkable Memory Cafe, which we heard members from Curtin and Perth speak of earlier. Regretfully, the funding for the Memory Cafe in Newcastle was cut—that doesn't happen in our city anymore, to a great shame. However, the Newcastle library at the local government level has picked up the Memory Project, a terrific activity where people come together on a monthly basis with an art therapist and historians. I'd also like to acknowledge a great podcast that my parents recently contributed to called Laughter and Tears: Living with Dementia. It's a podcast series hosted by ABC broadcaster Dan Cox, who has done a lot to make sure the issue of dementia is heard and respected in our community. 18:42 Mr FALINSKI G86 Mackellar My parents have also contributed to a podcast called laughter and tears. They said the 'tear' bit was bringing me up. I thank the members for Perth and Curtin for putting this motion forward. When I saw that both of them had done so, I thought, 'How can I repay them?' I can repay them by calling them both good friends of mine, thereby making their careers in this place less pleasant, and when they return to Perth, a state that I have referred to as the kingdom of Narnia, they can explain to their fellow Western Australians why they would have anything to do with someone like the member for Mackellar. While the member for Dobell is here, I want to pass on my sympathies for her father's passing due to dementia. As always, the contributions of the members for Macarthur and Bonner were insightful, and the member for Newcastle has given us a personal feel for what this is like. Before I came to this place, I was involved in the provision of goods and services to the aged-care sector. I got to see what wonderful work is being done by aged-care providers throughout Australia to help people with dementia. There is a greater concentration of people with dementia in aged-care homes than you would find in other parts of our society. Therefore, in many ways, aged-care providers are on the front line of dealing with people with dementia. It's interesting that we talk about sending people to Mars and exploring the depths of our ocean, and, every single day, we uncover such extraordinary knowledge of our universe—quasars, dark matter, black holes—and yet we understand so little about ourselves and what the brain means to human beings. When you compare us as a species with all the other animals we share this planet with, the thing that sets us apart, above and beyond anything else, is our brain. Our brains hold our memories, our personality, our capacity to innovate. They allow us to love, they allow us to care, they give us compassion and they allow us to work together. They have, in so many ways, changed the world in which we live. We stand today on the shoulders of such great thinkers, yet we understand so little about this mechanism that we have atop our bodies, which represents so much to us. When people begin to lose capacity and their brain starts to ossify because of plaquing, which we know is one of the features of dementia, they begin to lose not just their memory but their personality and their capacity to communicate and associate with other people. It becomes incredibly difficult for us to help people in that situation. They often revert to earlier years in their lives. The member for Macarthur was talking about having a workforce that is prepared for dementia, and he's absolutely right when he says that. One thing I observed in aged care was the number of people who had come to this country from elsewhere. For some reason I always pick on Italy. I think it's because the first time I came across this was in meeting a lovely lady who had come to Australia when she was 18. She spoke only Italian when she arrived. By the time I met her she'd been here 71 years, I think. She suffered from mild dementia, nothing serious, but she constantly would talk to me in Italian because she had reverted to her native tongue. Of course, that made it very difficult for her English-speaking carers, and she actually needed someone who spoke Italian. I think we need to be cognisant of that in our immigration and visa system—to ensure that our aged-care providers have the flexibility to bring people from different parts of the world to this country so that people have someone they can communicate with. I think both sides of this parliament, whenever they've been in government, have dedicated massive resources not just to this disease of the mind but to many other diseases of the mind. That is both appropriate and sensible. We will spend tens of billions, if not trillions, of dollars getting to Mars. I wonder if we are willing to spend that amount of money in dedicating ourselves to this inquiry—of ourselves and our minds. 18:47 Ms McBRIDE 248353 Dobell Firstly, I'd like to say thank you to the member for Newcastle and to her father, Kevin. Dementia is heartbreaking and it touches too many Australian families. There are many thousands of people living with dementia across Australia and there are hundreds of thousands of others who love and care for them. In my community on the Central Coast of New South Wales there are some 6,000 people living with dementia and 20,000 people who are involved in their care. As others have said, dementia is the second leading cause of death in Australia, right behind heart disease. For Australian women, dementia is the leading cause of death. It affects one in 10 people aged over 65, but dementia isn't just an illness of older people; if affects younger people too, like my late father. Every day, another 250 people are diagnosed with dementia and, tragically, we lose 36 people to dementia. Unfortunately, these numbers are set to grow in the coming years unless something changes. That's why it's so important for us to raise awareness. The more we talk about dementia, the more we can reduce its stigma and create a better future for Australians living with dementia and those who love them. We all have a role to play in creating dementia-friendly communities where everyone belongs, but one of the most important roles is that of carer. Carers do an incredible job, but their job has been made a lot tougher during the pandemic. Over the past 18 months, in-home support and day programs have been wound back or closed because of lockdowns. People living with dementia have struggled with isolation and loneliness, and so have carers like Liz. I spoke to Liz recently. She cares for her mum, who's living with dementia in residential aged care on the Central Coast. This year was really tough for Liz because she wasn't able to visit her mum for months. She could only talk to her through an iPad, and one time her mum went to pass her a cup of tea through the iPad. It's just devastating. She told me: 'During this time, our mother's older sister passed away and, only six days later, her youngest brother also passed away. We never had the chance to tell our mother of the loss of her siblings.' She told me she understands COVID-19 restrictions, but she said, 'These measures fail to include or address the immense impact that the absence of family visits is having on our parents' health and mental state.' On a personal note, she said her own mental health was exacerbated and that she started to suffer panic attacks and high levels of anxiety from being denied access to her frail mother. This lockdown has been tough. As Liz said to me, everybody wants the best of care for their parents, but more needs to be done to help carers, who only want the best for their loved ones. Families around Australia have been touched by dementia, and, as I said, my family is no different. I lost my grandma Molly to dementia when I was in my early 20s. I also lost my dad, Grant, to younger onset dementia when he was just 68 years old. That's why I made a promise to my mum, Barbie, that I would do everything I could for people living with dementia and those who love them. In honour of my dad, I decided to start the Grant McBride Memory Walk and Jog to support the important work of Dementia Australia and to raise awareness of and support for those who live in regional Australia with dementia. This year, we held the fourth annual Grant McBride Memory Walk and Jog, the second in a row held virtually. With most of New South Wales under stay-at-home orders and with lockdown fatigue kicking in across the coast, I really wasn't sure how many people would get involved, but Coasties joined in droves, showing their big hearts and generous spirit. I was hoping to raise about $5,000 to start with. Instead, we almost tripled our fundraising target, raising close to $15,000 for Dementia Australia. It's an incredible effort from communities under strain through COVID, and I'm so grateful to everyone who got involved. This event is about raising awareness. It's also about people feeling less alone and encouraging people to get active. I spent most of the day walking in my local neighbourhood with my friend Ali and her dog Polly, but I also saw plenty of other people getting out and about, too, like my old primary school teacher Sue Jarrett; dad's good friends Luigi and Georgette Bruni and their daughter Gina; Ross Fraser, who was running for his wife, Sue, and raised over $1,500; friends from Toowoon Bay Surf Life Saving Club Patrol 2—thank you Karen and your daughter Claudia; and from Long Jetty Landcare—thank you to Carly, Chris, Matilda, Georgia, Isabella and Patrick, who did a COVID-safe eight kilometres. I'm so pleased to say that, over the past four years, since the event first began, we've managed to raise over $61,000 for Dementia Australia. These funds will go such a long way towards helping us find a cure, and I'm grateful to everyone who's helped promote this important cause. 18:52 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper I commend the member for Dobell on her speech and pass on my condolences as well. It's a well-known and sad fact that the effect of dementia on the wider Australian community has been increasing in recent years. With life expectancy improving each year as a result of better living standards and medical developments, the likelihood of being affected by this particular disease has increased accordingly. There are around half a million Australians living with dementia, a figure which is estimated to more than double over the next 30 years. It may be a surprise to some that it is the second most common cause of death—and the leading cause of death amongst women—in Australia. The disease does not receive the publicity or the recognition in Australia that many others receive. Dementia is the single-largest cause of disability in people over the age of 65, and approximately 52 per cent of residents in residential aged care suffer with dementia. These are not just statistics, data on a page. I need to stress that these are people. These are unique individuals who have contributed to our society, who have led interesting and varied lives and who now deserve our support and our respect. They have differing needs, and the avenues taken to recognise and support them and their families need to be equally diverse and appropriately specialised. This government continues to work to meet these expanding needs. In my electorate of Cowper, we are ranked eighth in dementia prevalence in this country. The Port Macquarie state electorate shows the third-highest prevalence of dementia in New South Wales, with numbers expected to increase to 3,500 by 2050 in Port Macquarie alone. When I was a boy, my father used to take us on rounds. He was a doctor in a country town. As a child, I found it incredibly confronting when we would go into the rooms and speak to the elderly people with dementia. When, as a police officer for over a decade, I dealt with people who were suffering from dementia, it equally struck me that, at times, they were very much alone. It also struck me how very difficult it was for the families of those people suffering with dementia; it was as torturous for them as for the patient. When I first came into this role, I was approached by St Agnes's Care & Lifestyle, and they showed me modelling of a dementia village based on a Netherlands model. It was village-style accommodation incorporating 12 homes with 93 residents. There would be up to seven or eight in a house, with a full-time carer in there and with street landscapes—streets and shrubs and places to stay. It would be their home—a village where they felt like they were at home. When I saw it, I said to them, 'We have to do this so that we're not seeing people put away in the twilight years of their lives but instead they're given that accommodation and amenity that we all love and all strive for.' So, this month, I was so pleased and happy to announce $6.5 million from the federal government, through the Building Better Regions Fund, towards the $27 million village to be erected by St Agnes's Care & Lifestyle. At that end, I would like to thank Adam Spencer and Bronwyn Chalker from Emmaus. This is life-changing for these people and nation-changing for Australia, because I know that this model that they're putting up will be replicated up and down all the coasts around the country and in the country and the regions. That's exactly the way we should be treating not only our older people but people with dementia. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Biosecurity 180 18:58 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I move: That this House: (1) notes that: (a) on average, 2.5 million containers, 122,000 air and sea vessels, 22 million passengers and 144 million mail items arrive in Australia each year; (b) around 35,000 pest and disease border detections are recorded across biosecurity regulated pathways each year; and (c) the global and regional spread of pests and diseases is accelerating and trade volumes are growing; and (2) further notes that: (a) Australia has one of the most robust and effective biosecurity systems in the world, which is essential to keeping our nation safe from exotic pests and diseases; (b) a strong biosecurity system protects and empowers Australia's reputation as a clean and green producer of food and fibre, ensuring primary producers can maintain their production levels and attain premiums for their product in our international export markets; and (c) the agricultural industry's ambitious goal of $100 billion by 2030 is only attainable through substantial continued investment in biosecurity; (3) acknowledges and welcomes the Government's history of investment in biosecurity, which saw investment in biosecurity and export services increase from $630 million in 2014-15 to a record 1 billion in 2021-22; and (4) welcomes the additional $400 million in new funding announced through the 2021-22 budget to further expand biosecurity systems and safeguard Australian agriculture and our environment from exotic pests and diseases. We in this place all know the importance of biosecurity, but this motion in the House acknowledges it again and reinforces some pretty clear facts: 2.5 million containers, 122,000 air and sea vessels, 22 million passengers and 144 million mail items arrive in Australia each year; around 35,000 pest and disease border detections are recorded across biosecurity-regulated pathways each year; and the global and regional spread of pests and disease is accelerating as trade volumes grow. So it's little wonder that the Morrison Liberal government is taking biosecurity very, very seriously. Protecting our biosecurity status protects on-farm returns, access to overseas markets and our biodiversity, generating real, significant benefits for Australia's agricultural industry, regional communities and the environment. The Morrison government expects to provide over $1 billion for biosecurity and export programs this year, an increase of nearly $380 million, or 60 per cent, since 2014-15. From 2016-17 through to today, total Australian government expenditure for biosecurity and export services has increased 28 per cent in real terms. The $400 million biosecurity package announced in May's budget this year is a critical part of the Australian government's overall budget. It includes $84 million in funding for frontline on-the-ground measures to better manage the risk of pests and disease entering Australia, with a focus on known and emerging threats like swine fever, and an $80 million investment in modernising and improving Australian biosecurity technology. On 31 May, the government announced a world-first Australia-New Zealand trial of autodetection algorithms for 3D X-ray technology. There is also $235 million to improve our ability to detect and manage threats offshore. Australia's biosecurity system is a national asset focused on protecting Australian industry. We have a stretch goal of $100 billion of agricultural output by 2030. A key part of that is the Riverland citrus industry in my electorate of Barker. We produce $1.3 billion for the South Australian economy. That represents one per cent of our stretch target. Part of the reason for its success is that the Riverland was declared a regulated pest-free zone nearly 20 years ago. The pest-free area status means that produce from the Riverland can be shipped directly to international markets with recognised PFA status without the need for disinfectant treatments. It is estimated that those treatments would cost $4.2 million a year. Riverland citrus is exported to premium markets such as the United States, Thailand, Japan and New Zealand. All these markets would be at risk if we lost our PFA status. South Australia is the only mainland state recognised as being free of Queensland fruit fly, from the east, and Mediterranean fruit fly, from the west. Our local industry has done an amazing job to maintain that pest-free status. Nevertheless, there have been outbreaks. The industry is not only battling right now the pandemic challenges around labour shortages and supply disruptions; there's also a fruit fly outbreak in the pest-free area. Some growers estimate that, owing to the outbreak, their cost of compliance is running to $300,000 a year. It's in the national interest to protect South Australia from medfly from the west and Qfly from the east to ensure not only that our local industry in South Australia is protected but also that South Australia acts as a buffer between the two jurisdictions. South Australian industry and government have carried the burden of this issue for a very long time, both protecting the industry from outbreaks and eradicating the pests when they occur. South Australia has understandably taken that lead, but it's right now that we need the nation to lean in and help us maintain that pest-free status. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 Is the motion seconded? Mr McCormack 219646 I second the motion. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 265967 Member for Riverina, do you reserve your right to speak? Mr McCormack 219646 I'll speak after the member for Bendigo. I want to hear her fine words, Mr Deputy Speaker. 19:03 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo In my keenness to rise to speak on the motion that has been put forward by the member for Barker, I do acknowledge I was standing a bit early, so I thank you, Member for Riverina, for jumping in to second the motion. Biosecurity is an important issue in our country, and the electorates that the people in this room represent know how real this is. Despite some government ministers saying that Labor doesn't represent farming electorates, we have significant farming in my electorate. We have not just boutique industries where they have gone for high-value products; we still have quite a bit of commodity. One of the commodities that is still quite popularly grown but is constantly under biosecurity threat is the apples in our orchards in Harcourt. Every year, our apple growers struggle with fruit fly. I do not wish fruit fly upon any area of Australia. I know that in Tasmania they have their own running battles in trying to keep fruit fly out. And it's not just in South Australia that they're battling it; it's parts of Tasmania, it's parts of Australia where, if this fly gets in, it's hard to get rid of it. We are constantly looking for local ways that we can help our farmers and our growers battle this disease. I guess that brings me to ask the question, why has it taken so long for this government to act? This government has been talking about biosecurity and a biosecurity levy since they came to office. They first promised reform in the 2018 budget. That's when they first proposed the biosecurity imports levy, yet it is constantly delayed, constantly being reviewed, constantly being reformed. It wasn't until this year that they actually put the money behind genuine reform, which leads me to ask, why did it take so long? The biosecurity import levy was a great idea. It was about raising revenue from what is imported in order to fund a robust system, which is desperately needed. We talked about African swine flu a moment ago, in the contribution of the member for Barker. I know how real that is. In my own electorate, again, it was raised with me by Don KR, which is the biggest manufacturer of smallgoods in Australia. They are based in Castlemaine, and they are continually concerned about the importing of product and what product could come in, given the way people try to sneak around our tough biosecurity laws. They tell you stories about people importing ham, then importing the bone in a separate process and then trying to put it back together—crazy stuff that people try to do, to get around our biosecurity rules. We know that these are the extents that people will go to. That's why we need a robust system. So, it is disappointing that it has taken the government a long time to get to a place where they can now proudly talk about what they've done on biosecurity, because agriculture and farming and the value-adding industries that go with it are critical to this country. In this country we have banned certain forms of imports. I talked about pork before. You can import pork fillet to turn it into bacon, which they do a lot of at Don KR, but you can't import ham on the bone. There's a very good reason for that. It is because of the disease it carries. This is an area where all the regional MPs know what I'm talking about, because we live it and see it in our electorates every day. The people in their homes, in their kitchens and in their supermarkets are relieved that we do that. We know we need to have a robust system to keep disease out. There's another pandemic that is affecting humans right now, apart from COVID, and that is swine flu. A few years ago it decimated pig populations throughout Asia. Then it was found in the Timor-Leste, and we've had a few cases in Australia. We are working really hard to keep it out. That is why a system like this is critical to that clean and green image and to the food we eat. People have become really conscious about what they buy and what they eat. If we want to protect our industry, if we want to protect our imports and if we want to protect what we export, we need to have a robust system. I do agree that we need to have national leadership on this, to bring our states together and to make sure we're all working together on this. I feel for the Tasmanian apple growers. They're battling what is happening in my electorate. We don't want to see fruit fly in their electorates. That's why we need national leadership, to bring our states together to have a robust rapid response team when this disease gets out. 19:08 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I thank the member for Bendigo for her comments on biosecurity. She called for national leadership, and that is precisely what the Liberals and the Nationals are delivering. When I was in my first ministerial role I was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance. I well remember going down to the post-entry quarantine facility site at Mickleham, in the electorate of the member for McEwan, and looking at that 144-hectare site, which at that stage was just a greenfield—in fact, you could actually say it was a brownfield. That site has been transformed into a veritable Noah's ark. There are cats, dogs, horses, birds, plants and bees getting the proper quarantine that they need. At the time I commended the previous Labor government for having the vision to have all of that in one facility, because it superseded post-entry quarantine facilities in Sydney, Melbourne and Adelaide. But, of course, it took a Liberal and Nationals government to pay for it. It took a Liberal and Nationals government to build it, and indeed we did build it and it's making such a difference. I know that the Donnybrook Road facility is doing such a great job and it will continue to do that. The member for Bendigo spoke about leadership, and that's exactly what we are providing through one of these key pillars. We're trying, and we will, get our agriculture industry to grow to $100 billion by 2030. Biosecurity is one of the key pillars of doing just that, and that's why in this year's budget, delivered in May, we announced a package for biosecurity of more than $400 million, which is building on what we've done previously. Indeed, from 2016-17 to this financial year total Australian government expenditure for biosecurity and export services has increased by 28 per cent in real terms. That's delivery; that's getting on with the job. I know we as regional members understand—and I appreciate the member for Cunningham does too—how important biosecurity is. I've been in this place long enough to have served with John Cobb, a former shadow agriculture minister. I remember going to New Zealand with him on a self-funded tour to ensure that fire blight wasn't going to come into Australia with New Zealand apples, which had been allowed to be imported into our country. That is such a shame because we grow great apples at Batlow, in Tasmania and elsewhere. Right across the country, we grow great apples. Much as I love New Zealand and my friends across the ditch, why would we want to import New Zealand apples? I also remember the fear of outbreaks of the Asian bee and potential incursions of fire ants. The member for Bendigo mentioned swine flu. She mentioned all the things that people try to bring into Australia in their suitcases. This is just madness, and that is why we have increased fines and we have made sure that people who try to bring in prohibited items are literally sent packing back to whence they came—and so they should be. We want to make sure that our agriculture sector can reach that goal of $100 billion by 2030, and that's why we're doing everything we can. On 26 May this year the minister for agriculture released the Commonwealth Biosecurity 2030 road map. It's a plan to protect Australia's environment, economy—most importantly—and way of life by setting strategic actions and clear early deliverables. That's what we do. As Liberals, as Nationals, we make sure that our farmers are protected. We make sure that our animals are clean and green when they're being processed so that our export opportunities are not put at risk by anything that may come into this country, or anything that we may do in this country. I have to say the packaging, the labelling and the food origin requirements that have been placed on farmers have made the world of difference. You will recall, Mr Acting Deputy Speaker Wallace, the work that former senator John 'Wacka' Williams did in this place to make sure that that labelling is right. It all goes to food security; it all goes to biosecurity; it all goes to making sure that people know that, from paddock to plate, their food is going to be the best. Of course, Australian food is the best and Australian farmers are the best not only in the Pacific rim but right around the world. I compliment them and I compliment the government's biosecurity stance. 19:14 Mr O'DOWD 139441 Flynn The Australian biosecurity system is a national asset which we've got to be proud of. It's there to protect our agriculture and our exports. We are going gangbusters with our agriculture. This year we're on track for about $72 billion worth of product. This is up from about $48 million only a few years ago. Our farmers are renowned for the clean, fresh and green products that we produce. The Australian consumer loves our products and so does the export market. Biosecurity is one of the key pillars. If you listen to our agriculture minister, there are seven key pillars when it comes to agriculture; biosecurity is one, and a very important one at that. So, as we head towards $100 billion by the year 2030, we, as a government, must ensure that we are here to protect our lifestyle and the products that we produce. In this year's budget, as the member for Riverina said, over $400 million was put aside for a range of portable devices or machines that can be taken around by our Customs and Border Force people to detect what's coming in in containers and that type of delivery. It's very good; it's very effective. We need this money also to train our officers in the latest detection methods. Drones are now coming into favour; they're used for control of feral pigs, and camels and buffalo, more in the Territory. For instance, if foot and mouth was to get into the Northern Territory or into Queensland in the gulf country, we'd have no end of trouble. We'd find we'd have to destroy most of our herds of cattle, because it's very easily transferred. David Littleproud, our minister for agriculture, has proposed a road map and is doing great things to protect our environment, the economy and early delivery of products. And that's a lot of paperwork. As the member for Barker said, there's a hell of a lot of product coming in and out of Australia. We are an island nation, but we export over $80 million of product and we're a country of only 25 million people. It's for that reason that we've got to stop these diseases like canker. Canker is a disease that gets into our citrus food. It struck Emerald in my electorate, back in the early 2000s, and they had to have an exclusion zone for 30 kilometres—it took in the town of Emerald—and every citrus tree had to be destroyed and replanted and that area not used for three years. Swine flu is sweeping through China and other places around the world as we speak, and it's an outbreak that we don't want in Australia. BSE, or mad cow disease, is another disease that we don't want, and we'll fight tooth and nail to keep it out. White spot in prawns and crabs is another bad disease, and that has come into Queensland through importing raw prawns. Recently I was in Darwin at the barramundi farm up there, and what they fear up there is that we're still importing whole fish—that's the head, the gut and the skeleton, which of course we don't use in our kitchens in Australia—as that is where the disease is likely to be picked up, as with white spot in our prawns. They don't have visitors at the barramundi farm up there at Middle Point because they are so scared of introducing these foreign diseases. There's fruit fly—they call it the 'Queensland fruit fly', though I don't know why they call it the 'Queensland'— (Time expired) 19:18 Mr RAMSEY HWS Grey In reflection on the member's very good speech, 'Don't come the raw prawn with me,' I was thinking! I've been married for over 40 years and I've farmed for 35 years. My wife and I had been married for, I suppose, five or seven years when some new virus got into our wheat crops and we had to go off and purchase a whole heap of fungicides and spray them out to save the crop from severe devaluation She hadn't heard of it before—and I hadn't heard of this particular thing, either, at that stage—and she made up a list of all the things that, as a nonfarmer, she had never realised could go wrong with a wheat crop. There were about 35 things on the list. I looked at the list, and I said, 'That wouldn't be the half of them!' So there is this realisation that there are so many things lurking around that actually want to damage what we do so well here in Australia. We are fortunate because of the fact—and we've heard reference to it already—that we are an island, and that's given us a great barrier against so many of these things in the world, and we've managed to keep a lot of them out. A lot of them we haven't. Some of them we've even brought in ourselves. Rabbits, foxes, cats, sparrows and cane toads were all brought in on purpose. It's unbelievable when you think about it now. Until cane toads, they had all been brought in on the basis of ignorance. By the time we got to cane toads, we had actually worked out that some of these things coming into Australia were not good for us. One such case was prickly pear. So we brought in the cane toads 'after careful analysis' that was supposed to make sure they would do more good than harm. We got that one wrong as well. But I think we've become more sophisticated as we've gone along. The last outbreak of something that we brought in where we hadn't fully worked out whether it was going to be good or bad was the calicivirus for rabbits. It was a darn good thing it did get out, as it turned out, because it has given us a bit of a reprieve from the bunnies for some time. We are moving towards an agriculture sector worth $100 million a year. We're over $70 million now. It's an outstanding success. I won't get into the debate about what the climate has or hasn't done to Australian farmers. I will only remark that we grow more every year of better quality, and we are exporting all over the world. It's a great tribute to technology, to science and to smart farmers getting on with the job. I reckon every farmer who is about my age says, 'I don't see what we can do next that will be any better,' but they all do. We are on a continuing two per cent growth on production, without worrying about prices. So these are great outcomes, but we need to protect the sector. Some of those other things that are out there have been touched upon already. Foot-and-mouth disease is one. African swine flu, I think, is a very interesting one. It has decimated—actually 'decimated' is an overused word, and it's misused because 'decimated' means a loss of 10 per cent. It's actually been far worse than that, with more than 50 per cent of the herd taken out through Asia. We've kept it out of Australia thus far. I was talking to some scientists about it, and I asked them: 'What's the vector?' They said, 'It'll come in because pigs will eat offal.' I said, 'We don't feed offal in Australia, so that's not a problem.' And they said, 'No, we do.' I said, 'No, it's banned,' and they said: 'No, no. We've got backyard farmers with a couple of pigs. They go off to Asia or Italy or wherever they go for their holidays, and somebody gives them this bung of you beaut stuff, and they take that home for the family. When it's gone a bit off, after they've all had a chew on it, it goes to the pig out the back. That's where it will come from.' Then you understand, when customs officials are seizing all those goods coming in through airports—and we're talking tonnes of the stuff—how lucky we've been, up till now, to avoid it. I'm using up my time rapidly without getting to the point, but we have increased our funding over the last seven years by 60 per cent. That is obviously a very good thing, and there's another $400 million coming in as a result of the last budget. This is a serious, first-grade issue, not just for Australian agriculture but for Australia generally. We have a natural advantage and we need to protect it. We need to make sure that we keep ourselves as clean and free of these things as possible. There's pestilence and there are weeds. There's varroa mite which could take out the bees. It's an endless list, as I told my wife some years ago. The DEPUTY SPEAKER IPZ There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:24