﻿
<hansard noNamespaceSchemaLocation="../../hansard.xsd" version="2.2">
  <session.header>
    <date>2022-11-07</date>
    <parliament.no>2</parliament.no>
    <session.no>1</session.no>
    <period.no>0</period.no>
    <chamber>House of Reps</chamber>
    <page.no>0</page.no>
    <proof>1</proof>
  </session.header>
  <chamber.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-SODJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-SODJobDate">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;" />
            <a href="Chamber" type="">Monday, 7 November 2022</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The SPEAKER (</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Hon.</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Milton Dick</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">) </span>took the chair at 10:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>1</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petitions Committee</title>
          <page.no>1</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report</title>
            <page.no>1</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the second report of the Petitions Committee for the 47th Parliament.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The report read as follows—</inline></para>
<quote><para class="block">HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">PETITIONS COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">REPORT No. 2</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Petitions and Ministerial Responses</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">7 November 2022</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair Ms Susan Templeman MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Deputy Chair Mr Ross Vasta MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Sam Birrell MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Alison Byrnes MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Lisa Chesters MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Mr Garth Hamilton MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Tracy Roberts MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Meryl Swanson MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Report summarising the petitions and Ministerial responses being presented.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The committee met in private session in the 47th Parliament on 7 September, 14 September 2022, 28 September 2022 and 26 October 2022.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1. The committee resolved to present the fo llowing 172 petitions in accordance with standing order 207:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 7 September 2022</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—funding for an arena in Canberra (EN4104)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting federal action to address the Australian housing crisis (EN4105)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting review of the TGA decision to not recognise Sinopharm for over 60s (EN4107)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting review of the TGA decision to not recognise Sinopharm for over 60s (EN4108)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting abolition of the pre-approval for Australian Partner Visa Pathways (EN4109)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting the establishment of a film task force to develop and fund <inline font-style="italic">G.I. Jane 2 </inline>(EN4114)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting the removal of any Medicare levy surcharge penalty applied to fully insured spouse (EN4118)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting assistance for 491 and 494 visa holders for buying property (EN4119)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting assistance for Ukraine (EN4122)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting the government to bring back JobKeeper for flood affected regions (EN4125)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting non-for-profit homeless support be available 7 days a week (EN4130)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting the end of international travel restrictions for all unvaccinated Australians (EN4135)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting amendment to the Distribution Priority Area classification for the electorate of Bowman (EN4139)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting the reintroduction of the Cadet Corps in schools (EN4143)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting a 10- point Plan for Nature (EN4145)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting Government assistance scheme to help with cladding rectification (EN4146)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting legislation to allow nuclear fusion energy development in Australia (EN4147)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting financial support for Vaxine and their COVAX- 19/Spikogen vaccine (EN4149)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting that the IPCC Climate Change recommendations are made into law (EN4156)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting safer communities through rehabilitation under Medicare (EN4157)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting FHO grants for people with lifelong disabilities and carers (EN4158)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting compulsory Covid-19 vaccines for all members of parliament. (EN4159)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 177 petitioners—requesting labelling that includes the amount of food in a serving size (EN4163)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 36 petitioners—requesting payment for healthcare trainees during their placement hours (EN4166)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting it be a criminal offence to provide false political advertising (EN4167)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 30 petitioners—requesting the legalisation of the use, cultivation and processing of recreational cannabis (EN4168)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting AstraZeneca EVULSHELD be available for all immunocompromised Australians (EN4169)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting an increase to the bridging visa b application process speed (EN4177)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a lower price of diesel fuel (EN4179)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting a ban on mobile phone base stations in residential/rural residential lots (EN4182)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a functioning computer system for detainees at the Melbourne Immigration Transit Accommodation (EN4186)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting the ability to smoke within the MITA compound and buildings (EN4187)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting the Agricultural Trade and Market Access Cooperation (ATMAC) funding /grant for infant formula be rescinded or redirected (EN4188)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting amendments to the Veterans Acts (EN4196)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting an update to the Fair Work Act to validate employee grief from losing pets (EN4198)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting an audit on visa processing timeframes (EN4200)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 195 petitioners—requesting the prevention of 'outing' of lgbt youth (EN4201)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting Overseas Visitors Health Cover (OVHC) (EN4202)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting that the WHO pandemic treaty only be approved via public referendum (EN4203)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting an amendment to the Spam Act to include a mandatory unsubscribe option for political messaging (EN4204)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting a new definition for "evidence" under the Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 (VEA) (EN4205)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting mandatory CO2 vehicle emissions standards (EN4208)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting a new single-site regional public hospital for Albury-Wodonga (EN4211)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting sanctions for a corrupt individual (EN4213)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting Australia does not enter into any WHO pandemic treaty (EN4216)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting Australia does not enter into any WHO pandemic treaty (EN4218)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting Australia does not sign amendments to the WHO Pandemic Treaty (EN4220)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting Australia does not sign the WHO Pandemic Treaty (EN4224)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting a public referendum before entering into any WHO pandemic treaty (EN4225)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 22 petitioners—requesting Australia does not enter into any treaty with the World Health Organisation (WHO) (EN4229)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting the disclosure of outcomes associated with signing the WHO pandemic treaty (EN4230)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting a public referendum before entering into any WHO pandemic treaty (EN4232)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting a public referendum before entering into any WHO pandemic treaty (EN4233)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting a public referendum before entering into any WHO pandemic treaty (EN4236)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting the government sign the Intergovernmental Declaration on Children, Youth and Climate Action (EN4242)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4946 petitioners—requesting a moratorium on regional bank closures and a new inquiry (EN4244)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting increased wages for aged care and disability support workers (EN4246)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting all Australians to pay the Medicare levy (EN4248)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting a public referendum before entering into any WHO pandemic treaty (EN4255)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioner—requesting all 489 visa holders to have equal rights (EN4256)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting actions to expand media diversity (EN4258)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5235 petitioners—requesting tax changes for Australians living overseas (EN4259)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a change to asylum seeker policy (EN4260)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 26 petitioners—requesting Australia not sign any W.H.O. Pandemic Treaty (EN4266)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting a review of the Child Support System (EN4267)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting Australia to formally recognize the nation of Taiwan (EN4268)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting initiation of the IAEA milestones approach to implement nuclear technology (EN4269)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting the grant of eligible 887 visa applications immediately (EN4271)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting changes to the Interactive Gambling Act to include video game loot-boxes and microtransactions (EN4272)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting the removal of a ban on online poker (EN4274)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 33 petitioners—requesting Make Trikafta available for all persons with Cystic Fibrosis (EN4275)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting the imposition of a total economic embargo on the Russian Federation (EN4276)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 19 petitioners—requesting the removal of legislation preventing nuclear power plants in Australia (EN4278)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 39 petitioners—requesting more extensive military aid to Ukraine (EN4279)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 31 petitioners—requesting that Ukraine be included into the Australian Generalized System of Tariff Preferences (EN4280)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting early retirement for veterans and emergency service personnel (EN4281)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting that Hawkesbury be removed from 491 visa Regional Area (EN4282)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting the utilisation of unoccupied dwellings (EN4283)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting dedicated PTSD counselling for generational victims (EN4294)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting top surgery and bottom surgery should be covered by Medicare (EN4296)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting strengthened penalties for price gouging activities (EN4297)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting controls of state expenditure of funds to ensure fair access to medical facilities and resources (EN4298)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting solar feed in tariff rates to rise with electricity rates (EN4301)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting the allocation of more case officers to process 887 visa applications (EN4306)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 49 petitioners—requesting the Australian government insist on the return of Julian Assange to Australia (EN4310)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting that social media be made illegal for under 18s in Australia (EN4314)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting the return of consulate services in Bangladesh for visa processing (EN4315)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting homeowners be allowed to install data cabling (EN4318)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting a ban on products produced by Uyghur forced labour (EN4321)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 7 petitioners—requesting play therapy to be included in the NDIS (EN4324)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting funding for an integrated road and public transport plan for the electorate of Ryan (EN4326)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting extension of stays in Australia for stranded temporary visa holders through COVID (EN4327)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting the recognition of endometriosis as a disability (EN4330)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 23 petitioners—requesting Government inquiry into HECs (EN4332)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2753 petitioners—requesting a declaration of the Russian government and armed forces as terrorist organisations (EN4333)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioners—requesting help for Temporary Graduate visa (485) holders (EN4339)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting help for Temporary Graduate visa (485) holders (EN4340)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting a co-payment CGM subsidy for insulin dependent type 2 diabetics (EN4341)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting a review and update child support services and payments (EN4342)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 30 petitioners—requesting an investigation into chem trails (EN4343)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting full marriage equality in Australia for consensual incest-oriented adults (EN4345)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting Viagogo and its website be banned from trading in Australia (EN4350)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting processing time standards for Australia Border Force cargo release (EN4352)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting changes to the Veterans Entitlement 1986 Act (VEA) to avoid procedural apprehended bias (EN4353)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting action on humanitarian issues in occupied Jammu and Kashmir (EN4356)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 38 petitioners—requesting legislation to prevent non-Australian citizens owning land in Australia (EN4359)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 36 petitioners—requesting Mr Morrison be referred to the High Court as disqualified for election as a New Zealand citizen (EN4361)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Petitions c</inline> <inline font-style="italic">ertified on 14 September 2022</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 179 petitioners—requesting stricter laws to hold airlines accountable (EN4362)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting 485 replacement stream for onshore visa holders (EN4366)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 29 petitioners—requesting a change in Standing Order 38 to remove prayers (EN4367)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting action to stop the spread of Foot and Mouth Disease (EN4368)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6 petitioners—requesting a change to the Australian flag (EN4369)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting an increase in the Medicare rebate for all doctors and GPs (EN4373)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 811 petitioners—requesting a Hawkesbury/NSW mitigation flood plan (EN4377)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 17 petitioners—requesting the timeframes of 99-year lease agreements with overseas entities be reduced (EN4379)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2 petitioners—requesting amendment to the Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 (EN4381)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting legislation to confirm the definition of "clinical onset" (EN4382)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 6687 petitioners—requesting medicinal cannabis products be listed on the PBS (EN4383)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 29 petitioners—requesting the cost of general dental and dental procedures be lowered (EN4385)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 44 petitioners—requesting a removal of the ban on nuclear energy (EN4387)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 10 petitioners—requesting the age of criminal responsibility be raised (EN4390)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting a new national Motorsport Strategy (EN4392)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting the NDIS Chair be a person with a disability (EN4393)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioners—requesting continued drug and alcohol funding for Mallee-Murray (EN4399)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting access to social security for regional skilled visa holders (EN4400)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 84 petitioners—requesting more funding and help for carers (EN4403)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 37 petitioners—requesting a stop to all methods of geoengineering in Australia (EN4406)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 52 petitioners—requesting drug and alcohol testing for MPs (EN4408)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting extension of rural locum pharmacists in extenuating circumstances (EN4410)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5169 petitioners—requesting the legalization of the consumption and growing of cannabis (EN4411)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 16 petitioners—requesting help for the film and TV industry (EN4414)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 48 petitioners—requesting the retention of bulk billing in Medicare (EN4416)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 12 petitioners—requesting an investigation into the appointment to ministries of the Member for Cook (EN4417)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 71 petitioners—requesting an urgent increase in Medicare rebates for general practice (EN4418)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2081 petitioners—requesting changes to visa requirements and processing for parents of Australians and Permanent Residents (EN4419)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting plasma exchange clinics for patients with autoimmune dementia (EN4420)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting clear labelling of food products (EN4423)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 23 petitioners—requesting a referendum to change our Constitution to acknowledge First Nation peoples (EN4425)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting censure of secret ministerial appointments (EN4426)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 29 petitioners—requesting childcare subsidy for grandparents (EN4430)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 37 petitioners—requesting censure of the Member for Cook for secret appointments to cabinet roles (EN4432)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 666 petitioners—requesting changes to 491 visas (EN4433)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 28265 petitioners—requesting an inquiry into best practice for children identifying as transgender (EN4434)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 5 petitioners—requesting funding for improved facilities for AFL players and umpires (EN4440)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 40 petitioners—requesting funding for research to save the endangered Baw frog (EN4441)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting changes to allow self-managed superannuation funds to make capital improvements to rental properties (EN4442)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 40 petitioners—requesting a change to the national anthem to 'I Am You Are We Are Australian' (EN4444)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Petitions certif</inline> <inline font-style="italic">ied on 28 September 2022</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 272 petitioners—requesting the reduction of the three-year requirement for a 491-visa (EN4448)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1873 petitioners—requesting the Classifications Board to classify content containing non-consensual sexual acts (EN4451)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 356 petitioners—requesting the Inland Rail Route be changed to bypass Wagga's centre (EN4453)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting to stop the stage 3 tax cuts (EN4454)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 36 petitioners—requesting NDIS funding extension for children turning 7 in 2022 (EN4457)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 307 petitioners—requesting to stop the stage 3 tax cuts (EN4458)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9 petitioners—requesting food labelling changes to prevent non-meat products labelled as meat (EN4459)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting the removal of Peter Dutton from Parliament on the grounds of disqualification (EN4465)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 4 petitioners—requesting the removal of Mr Tudge from Parliament on the grounds of disqualification (EN4466)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 3 petitioners—requesting new federal education legislation (EN4467)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 14 petitioners—requesting a public holiday to commemorate Queen Elizabeth II (EN4468)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting 485 visa extension for onshore visa holders during COVID-19 pandemic (EN4469)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 8 petitioners—requesting Bitcoin should be considered foreign currency for tax purposes (EN4470)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2228 petitioners—requesting Steve Irwin on the $5 Note (EN4471)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 336 petitioners—requesting Steve Irwin on new $5 notes (EN4472)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 144 petitioners—requesting the new class of Australian Submarines be named the Holt Class (EN4473)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 9057 petitioners—requesting financial assistance be provided to university students on extended placements (EN4474)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 522 petitioners—requesting the provision of dialysis treatment buses (EN4477)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 11 petitioners—requesting the appointment of HRH Prince William as Governor-General (EN4478)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 13 petitioners—requesting Parliament to sit 140-160 days per year (EN4480)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 48 petitioners—requesting a referendum on the republic (EN4483)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 2180 petitioners—requesting a review of the decision to close Benalla Centrelink Office (PN0541)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 151 petitioners—requesting repeal of the 1997 Euthanasia Act (PN0542)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 1 petitioners—requesting a review of the Royal Commission into Banking (PN0543)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Petitions certified on 26 October 2022</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From 20 petitioners—requesting intervention and support staff for disabled children in every school (PN0544)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The following 8 ministerial responses to petitions were received:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Received by the Committee on 28 September 2022</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Education to a petition regarding the implementation LCBTQIA+ education into the sex ed curriculum (EN3892)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister of Veterans' Affairs to a petition regarding review of DVA dental implant policy (EN3937)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Received by the Co</inline> <inline font-style="italic">mmittee on 26 October 2022</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for the Arts to a petition requesting respect from the Federal Government for the contribution of creative industry (EN1674)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Infrastructure to a petition regarding TGV train for Australian cities (EN3432)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Environment and Water to a petition regarding protection of Brumby population in all states and territories (EN3929)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Health and Aged Care to a petition regarding MBS item for treatment options of Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (EN4062)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Assistant Treasurer and Minister for Financial Services to a petition regarding the removal of the fuel tax (EN4085)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">From the Minister for Health and Aged Care to a petition regarding the legalisation of cannabis (EN4102)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Ms Susan Templeman MP</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Chair—Petitions Committee</para></quote>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>5</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following 173 petitions:</para>
<para> </para>
<para><inline font-style="italic">The petitions were unavailable at the </inline> <inline font-style="italic">time of publishing.</inline></para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>5</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Responses</title>
          <page.no>5</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the following eight ministerial responses to petitions previously presented:</para>
<para> </para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">The ministerial responses were unavailable at the time of publishing.</inline></para>
<para> </para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PETITIONS</title>
        <page.no>6</page.no>
        <type>PETITIONS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Statements</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This bumper crop of petitions are the petitions that were requested during the election period and approved by the committee in its first meetings. After four weeks gathering signatures, these petitions are now presented to the House.</para>
<para>These 173 petitions represent over 80,000 signatures from Australians seeking improvement or change. Twelve petitions had over 1,000 signatures each, with topics ranging across health, immigration, foreign affairs and taxation. Over 2,500 Australians would like Steve Irwin to be on the $5 note.</para>
<para>After presentation to the House these petitions will be referred to the relevant minister for a response. These responses are due within 90 days. Ministers are required to provide responses even when the matter relates to decisions or actions of a previous minister or a previous government.</para>
<para>The committee appreciates the efforts of ministers and their staff to respond to petitions in a timely way. However there are a number of petitions that have not yet received a response. Over the next few weeks the committee will send reminders to ministers with information about any outstanding petitions.</para>
<para>Ministerial responses are an essential link in the chain of the petitioning process and I look forward to presenting more in the future.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>6</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersecurity</title>
          <page.no>6</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ANDREWS</name>
    <name.id>230886</name.id>
    <electorate>McPherson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that the:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Optus and Medibank data-breaches highlight the threats faced by Australians and Australian businesses from cyber-criminals;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) previous Government passed significant legislation to help protect Australians and our critical infrastructure from cyber-criminals; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) Government's lacklustre response to the data breaches does nothing to allay the concerns and fears of Australians who may have been impacted by these cyber-attacks; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to support the passage of the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Ransomware Action Plan) Bill 2022, which would help law enforcement disrupt and deter cyber-criminals who engage in ransomware and cyber-extortion activities targeting Australians and Australian businesses.</para></quote>
<para>I move this motion on behalf of all Australians who have been impacted by, and who remain unsure and worried about the extent of very serious cyberbreaches that have occurred in recent months—particularly, and notably, at both Optus and Medibank.</para>
<para>The silence from the government has been deafening on these breaches. The recent sobering annual threat assessment from the Australian Cyber Security Centre has documented our deteriorating cyber environment and has recognised cyberspace as a leading domain for warfare and crime, including extortion, espionage and fraud. The ACSC's third <inline font-style="italic">Annual cyber threat report</inline> revealed that it received over 76,000 cybercrime reports last financial year—a 13 per cent increase from the year before. That means the agency is receiving a report every seven minutes compared to one every eight minutes the year before.</para>
<para>In government, the coalition recognised the threat and took decisive action to harden our defences. We invested a record $1.6 billion to strengthen Australia's cybersecurity defences and meet emerging challenges in order to keep Australians safe. We boosted online safety with $125 million and a range of measures to keep Australians safe online, including the Online Safety Act 2021. We created new capability to identify and block SMS scams at their source. We gave police the powers they needed to police the dark web by passing groundbreaking new laws that allow law enforcement to intercept and disrupt organised criminals, paedophiles and drug pushers on the dark web and to shut down their evil trade. We introduced world-leading legislation to harden the defences of our critical infrastructure and systems of national significance, to ensure the community was better protected against serious cybersecurity incidents. We introduced the ransomware bill, referenced in this motion, which we re-introduced into this parliament and which we call on the government to support. It would create tougher penalties for cybercriminals.</para>
<para>And, importantly, we funded project REDSPICE in the March budget to meet the ongoing challenges we face as a nation. It's critical that project REDSPICE is delivered in full. REDSPICE is the single most significant investment to transform the Australian Signals Directorate's offensive and defensive capabilities. That's why last week I joined with my colleagues the shadow minister for defence and the shadow minister for cyber security to call on the Albanese government to guarantee future funding for offensive and defensive cybercapabilities.</para>
<para>The Albanese government should also support the swift passage of the coalition's ransomware bill, which increases penalties for a range of cybercrimes to give law enforcement, working in conjunction with our intelligence agencies, another tool to pursue cybercriminals. Our bill, which we first introduced earlier this year, would introduce a new standalone offence for all forms of cyberextortion so that cybercriminals who use ransomware face an increased maximum penalty of ten years imprisonment. It also introduced a new aggravated offence for cybercriminals seeking to target critical infrastructure, recognising the significant impact on assets that deliver essential services, with a maximum penalty of 25 years imprisonment. And it ensures that law enforcement can monitor and free the ill-gotten gains of cybercriminals by extending current powers that cover financial institutions to digital currency exchanges.</para>
<para>Mr Speaker, we don't pretend that this bill is a silver bullet, because no such thing exists, but it will present a new deterrent to these cybercriminals, and it is an important part of safeguarding Australians. Labor's absence on ransomware legislation is truly baffling, particularly when an alternative bill has been presented into this House. We on this side of the chamber remain very committed to ensuring that everything that can possibly be done is done to protect Australians. We are also concerned to make sure that Australians are given the information that they need, firstly to be able to protect themselves, but, when they have been the subject of a significant data breach or ransomware attack or any are cybersecurity incident, they are getting the information they need to protect, as much as possible, their data.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MILLER-FROST</name>
    <name.id>296272</name.id>
    <electorate>Boothby</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for raising this important and timely issue of cybersecurity. It is clear that the recent spate of cybersecurity breaches has had a significant impact on a large number of Australians. Whether they were directly affected or not, the breaches have had an impact on their sense of personal security and on their ability to have confidence in the digital systems that we increasingly use to run and coordinate our lives. Many Australians have had some of their most sensitive financial or health data accessed by criminals, and, anecdotally, particularly since the Optus and Medibank data hacks, people in Boothby have been at pains to impress upon me the increase in spam messages, phone calls and unwanted electronic communications that they have received. At a time when, increasingly, we conduct our lives with government departments, agencies and service providers—and even with retail—online and via text message, these scams directly mimic those interactions and undermine our confidence in the systems.</para>
<para>I'm proud to stand here as a member of the government that is working tirelessly to respond to this enormous challenge. Our data is, potentially, held by many, many companies and agencies, including in the private, not-for-profit and government sectors. We now know that a data security breach is reported in Australia every seven minutes. While not all are as significant as the Optus or Medibank hacks, which impacted potentially millions of Australians, each breach is a serious invasion of privacy. It was reported this morning that 9.7 million current and former Medibank customers have had their personal data included in this latest hack. Even if there is no financial loss, these data breaches cause major disruption and can be extremely unsettling. The inconvenience of having to have all of your ID and financial cards reissued has been a challenge for many of our citizens.</para>
<para>The area of cybersecurity is also a constantly evolving and mutating area of criminal activity, and that is why this government is putting so much focus and expertise into tracking down those criminals who seek to do harm to law-abiding Australian citizens. The Albanese Labor government is managing the consequences of cyber breaches by coordinating government responses and bringing together efforts of multiple government and law enforcement agencies. Just as critically, we are ensuring Australians have the information and tools they need to be protected from harm. The member's characterisation of the government's response to recent high-profile data breaches is disingenuous at best. The Minister for Home Affairs, Clare O'Neil, has led the coordination of multiple federal, state and territory agencies and departments to support a rapid, focused response. To respond to the Medibank incident, the Albanese government activated the National Coordination Mechanism to ensure that all possible support is being provided both to Medibank and to those Australians affected.</para>
<para>The National Coordination Mechanism brings together agencies of the Australian government, state and territory, as well as industry and private sector stakeholders. The Australian Cyber Security Centre has been providing technical advice and assistance. The Australian Federal Police are leading the criminal investigation. The Department of Home Affairs has been supporting Services Australia and the department of health to work with Medibank to confirm what information has been exposed and to put protections in place. Services Australia have put in place proactive mitigation measures focusing on minimising exposure of customer records and protecting the agency's claims infrastructure.</para>
<para>The recent cyber incidents have highlighted the previous government's failings to create effective incident coordination and response mechanisms or fit-for-purpose legal powers to manage the consequences. This is, sadly, no surprise, given that the former government abolished the dedicated role for cybersecurity in the ministry, just when Australia most needed to be getting ahead of these cybercriminals.</para>
<para>Cybersecurity is a serious challenge for any government, and this government is determined to keep Australians safe online. It's a serious area of public policy, so it's unsurprising that those opposite can muster little more than a feeble critique. They've never really been in the business of solving problems for the Australian people. It is, however, good that those opposite now realise how urgent this is, as their previous actions were—as with so many things—too little too late.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on this motion and to express my concern that the bill I seconded just a few weeks ago has been stonewalled by this Labor government. While Labor dithers and delays on cybersecurity, those who would do us harm continue to maliciously attack our small and family businesses and our critical infrastructure. This is the trend that, unfortunately, we are seeing more and more of. According to the ACSC's report released just last week, we've seen 76,000 cyberattacks over the last financial year. That equates to an attack every seven minutes. But those are just the reported attacks. How many unreported attacks are going on in this country? As the ACSC has noted, cyberspace is becoming a battleground, and we're seeing that most notably, of course, in Ukraine. It's not just cybercriminals, however, who are seeking to do Australians harm. Many attacks are being perpetrated by organisations within foreign governments designed to disrupt our very way of life and cause civil disharmony.</para>
<para>The bill that I seconded just a few short weeks ago, introduced by the member for McPherson, the shadow home affairs minister, was based on legislation we introduced when we were in government earlier this year. It would specifically reform criminal law and secure tougher penalties for all forms of cyberextortion in the event of the exact cybersecurity issues that we've been seeing in recent months—particularly in recent months in Australia. It forms part of the Ransomware Action Plan that the previous coalition government launched last year under the guidance of the then Minister for Home Affairs. It's a practical solution to an issue which costs as much as US$20 billion each year, and the number of those affected is only growing: Optus, Medibank, MyDeal, UnitingCare Queensland and Toll Holdings Ltd. These are enormous companies in Australia which hold very, very sensitive data on probably just about every Australian. Australians expect that their data will be protected. Australians expect that their government would take action to disrupt, deter and punish those involved in malicious cybercrimes such as these ransomware attacks. The opposition has offered good legislation to this government, free to take, free to implement and free to protect Australians' information. Instead, they seek to play politics by blocking sensible bills put forward by this opposition. And it is Australians and their businesses who are left to wear the consequences of serious data breaches.</para>
<para>So what is Labor going to do about this? It is essential that Labor outline what they are going to do about cybersecurity and data protection in our country. This is not a question of just hosting another summit or another talkfest; what are they going to do to get down to work and fix this problem? That is what Australians expect their governments to do; they expect them to work. Will Australians see the ransomware bill across the finish line in a show of bipartisanship on security? Will they consider the other measures which we brought to the table to protect Australians and their interests? Will they retain and deliver in full the record funding of almost $10 billion that we, when we were in government, made to implement Project REDSPICE, to strengthen our offensive and defensive cybercapabilities through the Australian Signals Directorate? It is absolutely imperative that we as a nation strengthen our ability to attack these sources that are seeking to attack us. It's not just a question of defensive measures; we have to increase and enable much better offensive mechanisms.</para>
<para>Lastly, I want to comment that there's no point in just putting investment into ambulances. We have to try and prevent things as well, which is what we're trying to do. I want to give a big shoutout to IDCARE, an organisation in my electorate which was funded by us when we were in government. If you have had your identity stolen or put at risk, contact IDCARE—do a Google search for IDCARE—and they will help you.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians have been rocked by two of the biggest data breaches and cybercrimes our country has seen, that is, Optus and Medibank, in the last few weeks. They happened so quickly and in such close succession that it has left people feeling even more vulnerable than before. Firstly, to the millions of Australians who have been affected by these data breaches: I express my sympathies and can understand the angst that you're feeling. It has been a difficult and worrying time for everyone. But I would also like to assure you that this government is doing everything to ensure that your personal information is better protected. This is more important than ever before. Just last week, the Australian Cyber Security Centre's <inline font-style="italic">A</inline><inline font-style="italic">nnual</inline><inline font-style="italic"> threat</inline><inline font-style="italic"> report</inline>, as we heard from the member for Fisher, found that a cybercrime is being reported every seven minutes in Australia. The report also showed an increase of 13 per cent in cybercrime in the previous year—and that was even before the Optus and Medibank issues occurred.</para>
<para>This is a very serious problem, one that exists in part because of inaction of the previous government over the past decade. Our existing privacy laws were left hopelessly outdated by the former government and they are not strong enough to ensure that our companies adequately protect the private information of Australians. If this can happen to Optus and to Medibank, two of the biggest company organisations in Australia, imagine what could happen to our smaller firms, our NGOs and smaller companies that maybe don't have the same resources that these two big companies have.</para>
<para>In comparison to the former government, this Albanese Labor government has reacted quickly, resolutely and with force to the recent attacks. We have wasted absolutely no time introducing legislation that will significantly increase penalties for these serious or repeated data breaches. Currently the maximum fine is $2.2 million. Let's face it: that is a pittance for some of these big companies. It really is not a deterrent; $2.2 million is peanuts. We need penalties that ensure that corporations storing Australians' data feel the full weight of responsibility and obligation to look after it properly. It is their responsibility to look after it properly, and Australians deserve nothing less. Therefore, the penalties we're proposing will be up to $50 million or three times the turnover for the relevant period. That could mean, for a large corporation, fines in the orders of hundreds of millions of dollars. We need a deterrent. Such fines are much harder to ignore and will act as a significant incentive for companies to take their data-protection obligations extremely seriously.</para>
<para>This bill I'm talking about will also give the Information Commissioner additional powers to make companies comply with their obligations to protect our data. As I said, when they store our data, our personal information, they have an absolute responsibility to ensure that it's stored properly. The bill will equip the Australian Information Commissioner and the Australian Communications and Media Authority to have greater information-sharing powers. But our efforts won't stop there because this is a serious problem. In addition to the legislation, the Albanese Labor government is undertaking a comprehensive review of the Privacy Act. This review is expected to be completed this year and will contain a raft of recommendations for further reform.</para>
<para>Australians can have faith in this government's commitment to ensuring that their data and personal information are protected. That is the starting point: their information must be protected. While there is no doubt that the world has changed, there is also no doubt that governments and businesses must adapt to this new threat—and it is a threat. One attack every seven minutes is a serious threat. It's not just Optus and Medibank; many organisations have been attacked by cyberthreats et cetera. This is precisely why this government is putting legislation in place to protect Australians' private details. It's also precisely what the previous government failed to do. Unlike them, we understand that, when Australians hand over their personal information, they have a right to expect it will be protected.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I've often said that the cyberdomain is the new international battleground. We've always thought about war in terms of air, sea and land, but if you own a smartphone and you're connected, you're on the battlefield, whether you realise it or not. This reality struck hard in September when Optus was the subject of a major cyberattack, affecting around 10 million Australians. Contact details and passport, drivers licence and Medicare numbers were compromised and hung over the head of Australians by cybercriminals. According to the Minister for Cyber Security, 2.8 million Australians had a significant amount of data taken—a serious breach—yet the minister saw it as more appropriate to tweet about the AFL grand final before publicly addressing the Optus attack.</para>
<para>Last month Medibank fell victim to a cyberattack where 3.9 million customers were affected. After a slow and confused response to the Optus incident, it took the minister a week to publicly respond to the Medibank hack, delaying government engagement. In a speech to parliament, the minister referred to the Medibank hack as 'an urgent wake-up call for Australia'. Yes, but it should not have been an urgent wake-up call for the government. When Australians hand over their personal data, they have a right to expect it will be protected. The annual cyberthreat report released by the Australian Cyber Security Centre last week concedes cyber incidents are growing in severity. In 2021-22 over 76,000 cybercrime reports were made, an increase of nearly 13 per cent from the previous year. That means one cybercrime report is being made approximately every seven minutes. The ACSC also reported an average of 69 calls to the cybersecurity hotline every day, an increase of 15 per cent.</para>
<para>These are alarming figures, yet while cybercrime is on the rise, our government is asleep at the wheel. Since the Optus attack, there has been no legislative response from the Albanese government. Instead, all we have seen the government do is host a virtual international counter-ransomware task force. Labour must ensure that there are stronger penalties in place for cybercriminals seeking to use ransomware. A private members' bill recently introduced by the opposition, based on legislation introduced by the former coalition government, would specifically reform criminal law and secure tougher penalties for all forms of cyber-extortion in the event of the exact cybersecurity issues we've been seeing. Disappointingly, in the week after we introduced the bill, Labor members on the Selection of Bills Committee blocked it from progressing for further evaluation, despite failing to provide any of their own legislation to deter cybercriminals.</para>
<para>While Labor stalls on legislation that the opposition is handing to them on a platter, Australians are continuing to fall victim to data breaches. I ask the government: what are they waiting for? The proof that the cyber domain is getting more dangerous is right in front of them in the ACSC's report, signed off by the Deputy Prime Minister. When will Australians stop having to pay the price for this government's inaction? In comparison, the former coalition government passed significant legislation to help protect Australians and our critical infrastructure. In November 2021, based on recommendations from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, we passed important amendments to Australia's national security legislation to better safeguard our community and economy from cybersecurity threats. Earlier this year, we launched the National Plan to Combat Cybercrime and opened a new cybercrime centre led by the Australian Federal Police. In March, the coalition government launched the most significant single investment in the Australian Signals Directorate's 75 years—REDSPICE, a $9.9 billion project to respond to the deteriorating strategic circumstances in our region. Last week I joined my colleagues the shadow minister for cyber security and the shadow minister for home affairs in calling on the government to guarantee that project REDSPICE, funded in the March budget, will be delivered in full.</para>
<para>We need to see Labor commit to investing in offensive and defensive cybercapabilities, work with industry to protect Australia from the escalating cyber threat and expedite the passage of new ransomware bills. The Australian people simply cannot afford any more delays, confusion or uncertainty from the Albanese government. This government's absence on ransomware legislation is harming Australians by the day, particularly when this bill has now been presented and Labor's only response to this issue is a task force. That's why I'm calling the Labor to support the swift passage of the coalition's bill, which increases penalties for a range of cybercrimes in order to give law enforcement, working in conjunction with our intelligence agencies, another tool to pursue cybercriminals. This bill is not a silver bullet, but it is a step in the right direction towards further safeguarding our digital future. It must be supported by a broad range of legislative, policy and operational reforms. The coalition stands ready to support measures to bolster Australia's defences to the ongoing cyber threat, and the passage of this bill would be a helpful start.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
    <electorate>Wills</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians have every right to be concerned about the Optus and Medibank data breaches, which have exposed the sensitive information of thousands of people and businesses. Of course, they rightly expect the Australian government to do everything it can to respond to such cyberattacks. But I have to tell you, this motion is simply absurd. For those on the other side to come in here and make such a brazen, politicised attempt to pull the wool over the Australian people's eyes is just astounding. Previous speakers have claimed that the Morrison government passed significant legislation to protect Australians from cybercriminals. Really? Then how do they explain these breaches? Why did their significant legislation fail to protect Australians and critical infrastructure?</para>
<para>I know why it failed. The former minister for home affairs—the same person who moved this motion—knows why it failed. When the breaches occurred, she along with Opposition Leader Peter Dutton led a conga line of shadow ministers and all the political puppet-show opposition speakers on this motion who have been seeking to ascribe blame to the new government and the minister while avoiding any responsibility. It was the member for McPherson, when she was home affairs minister, who switched on the cyber incident and critical infrastructure register reporting obligations for the critical infrastructure sectors on 8 April 2022. So far so good, but here's the kicker: it was her and the Morrison government that decided to leave out the telco sector. They left out telecommunications. That meant not only did they leave the door unlocked in this very dangerous cybersecurity neighbourhood when there is a rise of cyberattacks and cybercriminals, they left the door wide open, they left the backdoor open, they left the windows open.</para>
<para>The former government told the intelligence and security committee they would turn their mind to it if their existing obligations under the telco act were assessed as being unsuitable. But rather than proactively assessing the suitability of obligations on telcos, in classic form, of this opposition when they were in government, they kicked it into the long grass. So when the Optus breach happened response powers could not deployed to support Optus to respond to the incident. It was not just the former Minister for Home Affairs who was responsible, despite her brazen attempt through this motion to absolve herself of responsibility, the former Minister for Communications Paul Fletcher did not switch on the obligations for the telecommunications sector under the SOCI Act either. He should've been well informed—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Mr Hastie, on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Hastie</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd ask the member to refer to members by their correct titles, please. That's twice he's done it.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DE</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para> ( ): The member is correct. I remind the member for Wills.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KHALIL</name>
    <name.id>101351</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll do so going forward. He should've been well informed. He was an Optus executive. It's an absolute disgrace that they would come in here today and pretend that this failure is anything but one of their own making.</para>
<para>It was the Albanese Labor government that actually applied the cyberincident and critical infrastructure register reporting to the telecommunications sector after the election—straight after the election! We addressed the gap in the application of the SOCI obligations for telcos. Not only that, after the former coalition government abolished the role entirely, we established a cabinet level Minister for Cyber Security. She's been working hard, working with the agencies to actually address these problems to enhance coordination across government on cyberpolicy, cyberstrategy and cyber-response mechanisms. Thank goodness we did, because from the outset Minister O'Neil has been leading a dedicated team who have been working around the clock to protect Australians. We've had the toughest and smartest people in Australia and in the government working tirelessly to respond. That includes the excellent team at the Australian Signals Directorate, who are continuously updating the minister on active cyberincidents. They deserve our thanks, not the former government who made their job even harder.</para>
<para>Significant support is also being provided by the Australian Federal Police and the Department of Home Affairs to the Medibank and Optus incidents. And, of course, the AFP is leading a criminal investigation to hunt down and prosecute the attackers. Home Affairs has led the coordination of multiple federal, state and territory agencies and departments to support the response and put protections in place. To all of those dedicated public servants, I say thank you. Beyond the politicisation of this motion, they are doing a great job and they should be thanked. Unlike those on the other side of the House, they're not trying to escape blame or point the finger at others. They're taking responsibility and doing what needs to be done. I want them all to know that the Albanese government is right on their side, and all Australians, in protecting them from these attacks.</para>
<para>We're cracking down on hackers. We're making it clear with major increased penalties that companies have an obligation to protect consumer data. It's the Albanese Labor government that is actually putting all of these things in place to protect Australians.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BROADBENT</name>
    <name.id>MT4</name.id>
    <electorate>Monash</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's a lot of blame being thrown around this morning during this debate, which surprises me, but it probably shouldn't surprise me with the length of time that I have served here. In the book, <inline font-style="italic">The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo</inline>, which I recommend everybody read—written so many years ago—it describes exactly what we're going through at the moment. Our heroine uses her considerable skills in the cyber space to bring down her enemy either in information or in financial movements across the country, across the world. We are now living in that space. It's been coming for 20 years. I don't think Optus or Medibank enjoyed being hacked.</para>
<para>There's a sort of personal arrangement in this for me too. There's a building company—not a large company but not a small company—building homes, residences, trading really well, with a fantastic product. I asked a friend of the owner, 'What happened to the business? How did it go broke, when it was such a good business?' He said, 'To tell you the truth, it started with a ransomware attack on the company that cost the company $1 million to fix.' Now, if it had only involved that, the company could have survived easily, except that there were other forces that then came in. They included COVID and the mandates that were put in by the Victorian government that didn't allow their workforce to move, and their workforce was one that moved from site to site, wherever they were building homes. Because they were unable to move, they then—but that's a whole other story. Anyway, there were other problems with it. But it began with a ransomware attack on the company, which cost them $1 million to fix.</para>
<para>That means it's not just about the Medibanks and the big organisations. We are under threat as individuals. That was a family owned company. They have lost everything. They've lost their homes. They've lost their offices. They've lost everything. I hope and pray they will start again. But this is what happens, living in this cyberspace as we do today.</para>
<para>A member of the family was about to make a payment on the building of a residence. For some reason, he felt uncomfortable. It was $35,000. He was just about to, bang, press the button. He rang the builder and he said, 'Mate, it's got your name,' and everything was there, exactly the same as the last one that he paid. But, actually, he had been hacked, and, had he pressed the button, $35,000 would have gone straight into an account somewhere in Australia and then straight overseas within minutes. That's where we're up to now.</para>
<para>This is a war, but it comes down to the individual level as well. Members of parliament must get at least one call a week from people that are being scammed, or someone's trying scam them—all the time. So as a nation we have to be really on our guard. I believe the previous government did the best they could.</para>
<para>Optus and Medibank didn't want to go through the process they went through. They believed that they had armour in place so they couldn't be hacked. But somebody smarter than the person who was doing the protection was able to bypass the protection they had in place. That's what we're facing every day. So it's a whole-of-government exercise—and whole of community and whole of business. Sorry, but, to me, whacking a $1 million penalty on me is not going to make me do any better to protect my business than I would otherwise do. I will do everything to protect my business, my family and my activity. And every company is like that. I step into this space and say we've got to work together as a nation, as a people, as best we can, and we charge this government with that responsibility on behalf of the people of Australia. The greatest holder of information is the federal government of Australia, so we need to be looking at making sure our data can't be breached so that we can survive into the future.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SITOU</name>
    <name.id>298121</name.id>
    <electorate>Reid</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to match the member for Monash's fictional reference with one of my own. I remember watching Sandra Bullock's movie <inline font-style="italic">The Net,</inline> a cybersecurity movie about the internet and identity theft. The movie came out in 1995 and felt like Hollywood at its story-telling best. It was long before social media, smartphones and apps, so it seemed unbelievable at the time. How could people steal your identity and conduct surveillance on you via your computer? As Sandra Bullock's character tries to explain her predicament to a sceptical lawyer, she says: 'Our whole world is sitting there on a computer. It's in the computer, everything: your DMV records, your social security, your credit cards, your medical records. It's all right there. Everyone is stored in there. It's like this little electronic shadow on each and every one of us, just begging for someone to screw with, and you know what? They've done it to me, and you know what? They're gonna do it to you.' The movie was prescient for its time because all those concerns dreamed up by scriptwriters more than two decades ago have now come to pass. In 1995, Hollywood was able to imagine just how vulnerable we would be to cyberattacks and data breaches.</para>
<para>Unfortunately for us, the previous government failed to show any of that foresight. They failed to create an effective incident coordination and response mechanism or set up the legislative tools to manage the consequences of data breaches. They failed to even acknowledge the significance of this threat, and we know this because they abolished the dedicated role of cybersecurity in the ministry. Those failures are made even more stark given how much of our lives has now moved online. I had to hand over my personal information to read the news, to purchase shoes and even to pay for my son's school lunches. When so much of our lives is online, more than ever, consumers need protection from fraudulent behaviour and privacy and data breaches. They need a government to be on their side to make sure that businesses have the right tools and incentives to protect our data. The Optus and Medibank data breaches demonstrated that neither were in place when we came into government. The sensitive financial identity and health data of millions of Australians has now been exposed and the potential losses these Australians face are immeasurable.</para>
<para>It's this government that recognises the immense harm individuals could face from cybersecurity attacks. That's why, from the very beginning of the Optus and Medibank incidents, we have had the smartest experts from the Australian government working on a response. We have put the full weight of the Australian government into finding the attackers, coordinating government responses and keeping Australians informed so they can protect themselves. The Australian Signals Directorate's Australian Cyber Security Centre, the Australian Federal Police and the Department of Home Affairs are providing significant support to help investigate these breaches. I want to thank all these men and women who are working tirelessly to help protect Australians for their professionalism. It's the Labor government that has begun the important work of protecting the personal information of Australians. We've closed the gap that the previous government left in the Security of Critical Infrastructure Act by switching on the cyber incident reporting and critical infrastructure register for the telecommunications sector.</para>
<para>We've appointed Australia's first dedicated Minister for Cyber Security to the cabinet, which will allow for better coordination across the government on cyberpolicy, strategy and response mechanisms. We have brought in legislation to beef up penalties for organisations that fail to protect the personal information of customers from hackers, increasing the maximum fine for serious breaches from $2.2 million to at least $50 million and giving companies an incentive to put the work and resources into protecting customer data. We've done that because Australians have a right to expect that their personal information will be protected. We are developing our new cybersecurity strategy for Australia to equip us with the tools to prevent, detect and manage the impact and consequences of cyber incidents. We need a response that will meet the challenges of our time, and this is a government that is getting on with doing that.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allocated 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.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Victoria: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>12</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the Government's $2.57 billion in funding in the 2022 October Budget for the infrastructure Victoria, and Victorians need, including:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) $2.2 billion for the Suburban Rail Loop;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) $57 million for the Ison Road Rail Overpass in Wyndham;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) $150 million for the Camerons Lane Interchange in Beveridge; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) $125 million to upgrade Barwon Heads Road;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes this funding will make journeys quicker, and make sure Victorians can get home to their families safely, and comes after a decade of neglect for Victorian Infrastructure from the former Government; and thanks the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government and the Prime Minister for working with the Victorian Government.</para></quote>
<para>After a decade of neglect under the former Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Liberal government, I'm pleased to report that federal investment in the seat of Lalor is back, federal infrastructure investment is back and so are serious processes to ensure that projects stack up. After a decade of Victoria being starved of infrastructure investment by the Liberals, the budget handed down by Labor the last time this House met involved $2.57 billion in funding for Victorian infrastructure. I'm sure the members for McEwen, Corangamite and Jagajaga, who will speak after me, will explain how this investment will benefit the people in other parts of the great state of Victoria. But this is a big win for the outer west.</para>
<para>The budget includes joint funding with the state Andrews Labor government to build the $114 million Ison Road Rail Overpass in my community in Wyndham, with the construction to begin next year. Known to some as stage 1 of the Wyndham Westlink, this project will construct a road overpass bridge across the Melbourne-Geelong railway line, extending the South Road towards Browns Road and connecting with the local section of the Ison Road to be constructed by Wyndham City Council. The project scope includes a new four-lane road and a bridge over the rail line that is future-proofed for six lanes and has a shared-user path for active transport. This will ink the new and booming suburbs in the west of Wyndham to the freeway.</para>
<para>The current residents of Wyndham Vale, Manor Lakes, Harpley and Jubilee won't be the only beneficiaries of this city-shaping project. By 2036 this road is expected to have almost 30,000 daily users. As a result, by these residents having the direct link to the freeway, almost 30,000 cars will be off the roads rather than travelling into Werribee only to head back out again to the freeway. This is what you call conjecture busting: forward thinking, planned for our growth area.</para>
<para>While the Victorian state Labor government have done amazing things regarding infrastructure in our growing community—like removing the three level crossings in Wyndham; spending $1.8 billion on the Western Roads Upgrade, $1.2 billion in the north of my electorate; expanding parking options at local train stations and providing more services on the regional rail link—it requires federal and state governments to work together to deliver this type of city-shaping infrastructure. For almost 10 years our community, one of the fastest-growing in the nation, was starved of federal infrastructure investment. This bridge was committed to by Labor in opposition at the previous election, and those opposite failed to do that funding in the last term. Unlike when the Prime Minister was infrastructure minister and our community saw huge infrastructure investment worth over $4 billion in local infrastructure projects, we saw nothing under the Liberals. My message to locals is this: we finally have Spring Street and Canberra working together to deliver this project. Let's continue this collaboration beyond 26 November.</para>
<para>For context, we got nothing out of the state Liberals the last time they were in office—not one school built in the fastest-growing community in the country in their last four-year term. You can't trust people who claim to have the solutions to problems X and Y when they did nothing about it when they had the chance. That's the truth. Only federal and state Labor governments will deliver for my growing community. That is evidenced here by the commitment to this bridge, to this overpass that will take 30,000 cars out of the middle of Werribee and put them directly onto the M1.</para>
<para>I can't wait until this bridge opens. I can't wait until people can find their way onto that freeway more quickly and save themselves 15 or 20 minutes on their daily commute each way, simply by having a state and federal Labor government that is committed to improving the lives of people who live in our growth corridors and committed to ensuring that projects stack up and deliver for communities.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Rob Mitchell</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TUDGE</name>
    <name.id>M2Y</name.id>
    <electorate>Aston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>If ever there was an example of the Labor Party neglecting the eastern and south-eastern suburbs of Melbourne it is this year's infrastructure budget by the new Albanese government. When you look at what they did, effectively they cut so many projects from the eastern and south-eastern suburbs and placed a lot of money back over into the west of Melbourne—and, funnily enough, into their seats, many of which are marginal seats. I want to go through some of those key projects that have been cut. These are projects that, in many cases, have been on the books for decades and which, in many cases, have been prioritised by VicRoads themselves for more than a decade yet they have been cut from the budget. The money was there. We finally delivered the money for these projects but they've been cut. Let me take you through them.</para>
<para>Perhaps the most obvious one is the duplication of Wellington Road. This was prioritised by VicRoads almost 15 years ago. The reason is that it was at capacity then. Back in 2016, there was a study done that showed 20,000 cars on this road every single day. It was full and, believe me, there's been a lot more traffic since. It's also had, in the five years up until that point, well over 100 crashes with many serious injuries and one fatality. It's a very dangerous road. It also happens to be the major evacuation route from any fires up in the Dandenongs. So it's a critically important road to be duplicated, and that was the funding that we got to get that to happen. Incidentally, the Labor Party matched the exact same funding. What have they done now, though, in this budget? That's gone. They promised it. We promised it. Money now gone. I'll also go through other projects that they've cut.</para>
<para>There's the Dorset Road extension. There's been $80 million allocated. It's been on the books for decades. We finally delivered the money. This Labor government cut it: money gone. There's the Napoleon Road duplication, desperately needed for all of those residents who travel that road from Rowville or Lysterfield and further afield. They know it's desperately needed. It's gone. There are the commuter carparks for Boronia and Ferntree Gully. These are desperately needed, because they get full early—</para>
<para>Gov ernment members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member is entitled to be heard in silence.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TUDGE</name>
    <name.id>M2Y</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and it just means people drive further along until they get to the next one. They also won't be funded. There's the Rowville-Monash rail, with $475 million allocated. That would have finally connected Monash University to the rail line. It was there. It's been on the books for decades. It has also been axed. Have a look, though, at what has been funded. They've neglected the east. They got rid of the East West Link. They scrapped all these projects. What have they funded in this budget? I'll take you through some of them.</para>
<para>We have the one that the member for Lalor was just referring to, the Ison Road overpass, in the member's own electorate. There's another one over in Corangamite, a marginal Labor seat. There's a further one, Camerons Lane interchange, in a marginal seat in McEwen, up in the north. There's a further one in McEwen for the Macedon and shire roads—another Labor marginal seat. There's another one for a business case upgrade in the Labor seats of Hawke and Gorton. There is one little project—$10 million only—for Gippsland, a safe National Party seat.</para>
<para>Effectively, the money's been taken out of the eastern and south-eastern suburbs—as they always do, as they did with the East West Link scrapping—and put into Labor seats in the west and north, with one exception: $2.2 billion for Dan Andrews' pet project, the suburban rail loop, a project that will go from Box Hill down to Cheltenham—which no-one ever takes—for $35 billion. It hasn't been cleared by Infrastructure Australia. The business case didn't stack up. The Auditor-General found that it only got a 50c return for every dollar invested. But it's Dan Andrews' pet project on the eve of an election so that one gets funded as well. It's a disgrace, and the eastern and south-eastern suburban residents have been left out, yet again, by the Labor Party.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll tell you what, that's the biggest own goal since Yeppoon versus Yeppoon, isn't it, putting the member for Aston up to talk about infrastructure—the architect of the carpark rorts scheme! There were carparks being built where there are no railway stations. He sits there and says, 'Oh, the eastern suburbs of Melbourne are missing out,' despite the fact they're getting $2.2 billion in spending. But what's great—and I want to get this on the record before the member for Aston scurries out—is that he is the man responsible for having claiming to fund extra lanes on the Hume Highway but then doing a dodgy deal separately and never doing it. It was never delivered.</para>
<para>He wants to talk about Camerons Lane. Camerons Lane is going to open up jobs and infrastructure for schools, health and all that. In fact, they committed to it, and now he's complaining because we're actually delivering it. This is just hilarious. Why the opposition would put him up as their lead speaker is beyond the pale. This is the man who was the architect of all the rorts and rip-offs that we had to put up with during the last election.</para>
<para>But now we have a government of mature members who actually want to go and get things done and work together. We know that they promised the Wallan ramps but never delivered them. In fact, in three years they hadn't even delivered the planning money to put them in, because, when it comes to infrastructure, that lot opposite were all talk, no action. We'd see more press releases than we'd see any delivery in the north or the west, and that's because this minister here—the former minister, sorry—is just an embarrassment, and, gladly, he is now a former minister. You wouldn't think he was from Victoria, would you? Really! The vast majority of money that goes to Victoria goes into the eastern suburbs, and he's complaining about it.</para>
<para>The East West Link was a prime example. He went to two elections saying, 'The East West Link is a referendum. If the Nationals and Liberals in Victoria win, it should be done.' Guess what? They lost them. In fact, Daniel Andrews has one of the largest majorities through that specific project. Talk about flogging a dead horse—it's over there!</para>
<para>But let's talk about what is happening. What is happening as that we are finally seeing governments working together. In regard to the Watson Street interchange, I was with the Deputy Premier, Minister Ros Spence and Lauren Kathage, Labor's great candidate for Yan Yean, as they announced $130 million to finish off the Watson Street interchange on the Hume Highway. This will save people up to 45 minutes each way when they are getting in and out of town, something those opposite promised and promised but never delivered. We've done that in five months. Not only did we commit to it; we've delivered the funding. Imagine that: having two governments working together to do the things that actually matter for our communities. That's what is happening with the Watson Street ramps.</para>
<para>We heard the Liberal candidates time and time again spread the lies: 'We're going to do it. We're going to do it. We're going to do it.' Yet, after nine years in government, what did we receive? Nothing. In fact, that minister and his mate, the member for Hume, were out there saying that the Labor MP had delivered nothing for our communities in nine years. That was the nine years that they were in government. Yet every single thing we have promised is being delivered.</para>
<para>He talked about Mitchell and Macedon Ranges road problems. There are absolutely lots of problems, as a result weather and a whole heap of things, but that was money they committed to as well, so he's complaining about money that we are actually investing in communities—doing what matters for our constituents—that is the same money that they were going to invest. The hypocrisy is just amazing, and you really wonder how he sits on the front bench over there. I guess it's not actually an IQ race over there, is it? because they'd be struggling to get double digits at the best of times.</para>
<para>What we've seen is the Albanese Labor government working with state governments, including the Premier of New South Wales, who said he felt he'd been robbed because New South Wales didn't get everything. Well, we know the former Prime Minister for Sydney, the member for Cook, who was the Treasurer, the health minister, the office cleaner, the COMCAR driver and anything else you could think of, was loading money into Sydney left, right and centre to support Gladys Berejiklian and was ripping Victorians off. Victorians and the rest of Australia have said: 'Enough's enough. We want a government that actually does things that matter.' And that's what is happening.</para>
<para>Through this infrastructure spend that we have and that we have delivered through this budget, after a lot of hard work from our MPs and candidates working together and working with their state governments of all persuasions, we've actually got results that matter. Watson Street will happen only under a federal Labor government and a Victorian Labor government. It will not happen under a Liberal government, because it never has and never will, and it's about time those opposite apologised.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It is remarkable that we are being asked to acknowledge and be grateful for $2.57 billion in funding in the October budget for Victorian infrastructure from those on the other side who are professing to have superior IQs. The adage is that you should never look a gift horse in the mouth; but it is spring racing time, so we can at least do the form! This is remarkable, because the last budget delivered by the coalition allocated $3.3 billion to Victoria for road and rail projects to keep people and freight moving and to grow the economy. That's the difference: growing the economy. The investment took the coalition government's total commitment to transport infrastructure in Victoria to $35.5 billion since 2012-14. We can all do the maths—or most of us can do the maths—but there's a bigger underlying problem: $2.2 billion is being poured into Premier Daniel Andrews's pet project, the Suburban Rail Loop. The $125 billion price tag and the expected finish date of 2085 are staggering. Not only will this city-centric pipedream siphon off a disproportionate amount of infrastructure investment every year for decades to come but the Victorian Auditor-General has also found that the business case did not support informed investment decisions, and that for every dollar spent on the project the return is just 51c. Infrastructure Victoria's independent 30-year infrastructure strategy, released in 2016, did not include or signal a need for an orbital rail line in Melbourne, and yet here we are.</para>
<para>The Victorian Auditor-General also looked at the Melbourne Airport Rail project. This isn't a major project that came out of the blue, like the Suburban Rail Loop, or out of someone's head, but it has had numerous false dawns over many decades. The business case for this was also found to be undercooked, including on key questions like affordability and options assessment. This is important, because in its current form the $5 billion will build yet another expensive taxpayer funded monument to missed opportunity in Victoria. And we've been here before, with the Regional Rail Link, completed in 2015 under a federal-state partnership. It allows trains from Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo to bypass the congestion on the suburban rail network. The Seymour and Shepparton line, which services the electorate of Nicholls and other electorates of those opposite was not included in the link—a missed opportunity at the time. Equally, the Melbourne Airport Rail project will do nothing to advance the connectivity of northern Victoria. It could have, if the project were designed with the capacity for high-speed electrified trains from the regions, particularly from the north and the north-east. The first VLocity trains travelled to Shepparton just last week and, thanks to $320 million of investment by the coalition, when in federal government, the line will soon support nine return services a day and faster speeds of 130 kilometres per hour. That is, of course, until those trains hit the suburban rail system.</para>
<para>The improvements to rail services in my electorate are welcome and long overdue but, at a time when housing affordability and the cost of living are pressing issues, we should be leveraging major rail infrastructure projects to improve regional connectivity. The regions have the capacity to grow and absorb a greater proportion of our population. When spending public money, we should be trying to benefit the greatest number of people and we should not be missing opportunities. The future is high-speed rail, not just as a connector between capital cities in different states but to connect regional cities and capital cities within states. If we don't want Australia to become a nation of unaffordable megacities, we need to face up to the challenge of growing our regional cities.</para>
<para>The three projects I have mentioned total more than $133 billion. For that eye-watering amount, the design should include a dedicated conduit for electrified high-speed trains from regional centres to the north of Melbourne and through the north of Melbourne. Instead, I believe we are squandering billions on the Victorian government's Suburban Rail Loop—and there are other projects. The floods in Shepparton and Mooroopna closed the causeway linking the cities, and the coalition has set aside $208 million to progress the first stages of the Shepparton Bypass, a critical project which links the two cities of Shepparton and Mooroopna—especially when disasters like flood happen. The Andrews government has not committed to build it; it has played politics with it. The time for games is over and we need to build the Shepparton Bypass.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:04</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government is about building a better future. We are building a better future for all Australians, and that means building infrastructure that leaves a lasting and meaningful legacy for communities, particularly in high-growth areas like mine in the electorate of Corangamite, which includes the Surf Coast, the Bellarine Peninsula, the Golden Plains and parts of Greater Geelong. The first Albanese government budget takes an important first step in ensuring federal infrastructure spending is responsible, affordable and sustainable. We're delivering on our election commitments with a total investment of $55 billion in transport infrastructure across every state and territory.</para>
<para>Infrastructure development is a joint responsibility of all levels of government, a partnership in the national interest. In my own state of Victoria, the budget committed $2.57 billion, including $2.2 billion for the suburban rail loop, $57 million for the Ison Road rail overpass in Wyndham, $150 million for the Camerons Lane interchange in Beveridge and $125 million to upgrade Barwon Heads Road in my own electorate of Corangamite. I congratulate the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government for working so closely with the Daniel Andrews Victorian government to deliver funding on these much needed and significant projects.</para>
<para>The largest allocation for Victoria is for the visionary suburban rail loop. Despite the naysayers, this rail loop will be transformational for the state of Victoria, particularly for the way in which people move around Melbourne and its suburbs. This is what the suburban rail loop is all about, and it's good for the economy, jobs and construction. As with every infrastructure commitment under the Albanese government, the Melbourne Suburban Rail Loop will be subjected to due project assessment and scrutiny.</para>
<para>All of the other key infrastructure investments for Victoria in the budget are equally important in their own way and to their own communities. Take for example the stage 2 upgrade to Barwon Heads Road, which services the rapidly growing urban area of Armstrong Creek. I know well the need for this arterial link road. My electorate office is in the heart of Armstrong Creek, and the Armstrong Creek growth area is one of the largest urban growth areas in Victoria, consisting of 2,500 hectares. Ten years ago, Armstrong Creek was open farmland with cattle and sheep grazing. Now, Armstrong Creek is well on the way to providing housing for between 55,000 and 65,000, with approximately 22,000 residential homes. The old narrow two-way Barwon Heads Road could not possibly handle the huge volume of vehicles accessing this new growth area.</para>
<para>The first stage of the upgrade is well underway. The funding of $125 million in the October budget will contribute to the much needed second stage. Stage 1, when complete, will add new lanes for four kilometres between Settlement Road and Reserve Road, remove a dangerous level crossing at Marshall and upgrade the intersection at Settlement Road and Breakwater Road. Stage 2 will continue the duplication from Reserve Road through to Lower Duneed Road. Infrastructure Australia had some years ago evaluated the original business case for the upgrade and confirmed there was significant benefit in duplicating the road, with a total economic benefit of $569 million. Barwon Heads Road is a crucial link between Geelong, the growing Armstrong Creek residential precincts and towns, including Ocean Grove and Barwon Heads, on the Bellarine peninsula. This upgrade is so important to our region, and it will provide better connections to public transport and ensure that Barwon Heads Road can support the 44,000 daily journeys expected by 2031.</para>
<para>Building a better future is not just a political slogan. It has been Labor's aspiration for many decades. Think about projects like Andrew Fisher's transnational railway and Chifley's Snowy River scheme. Labor thinks long term and with vision. In years to come, people will look back at the Melbourne Suburban Rail Loop, the Barwon Heads Road upgrade, the overpass at Wyndham and the interchange at Beveridge and see these as essential and visionary. I congratulate the minister for leading with vision on nation-building infrastructure, and I thank the member for Lalor for this important motion.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Ahead of the budget, my electorate of Indi was anxious about which hard-won infrastructure commitments might be lost to the government's infrastructure review. Yet, on budget night, I was relieved that months of advocacy to save our projects had paid off. I thank the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government for her commitment to meeting and listening carefully to the mayors and CEOs of the nine Indi LGAs when she was visiting Bright recently. She gave us close to two hours of her family holiday time and heard firsthand of the challenges we face.</para>
<para>The $80 million promised to the Albury-Wodonga Regional Deal has remained in this budget. Had this been axed, it would have been a huge blow to locals who have worked in good faith on the regional deal for years. With funding confirmed, we can start scoping out projects in health, housing and more. Also saved was $9.8 million for road upgrades in Mansfield under the Remote Roads Upgrade Pilot Program. This will deliver considerable upgrades to Highton Lane, Rifle Butts Road and the Boorolite-Chapel Hill Road to improve their safety. Our community will also keep $900,000 for the Biggara Recreation Reserve for the completion of the master plan—a huge relief for this little community that's been through so much.</para>
<para>But, given the massive rain events across the eastern seaboard, it was hard not to be concerned by the lack new roads funding. Not the blockbuster announcements the member for Lalor refers to in her motion; I mean the meat-and-potatoes highways, byways and backroads that are the lifeblood of regional Australia. In Indi, like electorates across Australia, our roads are disintegrating before our eyes. Floods and rain are eroding the road surface, and the potholes—by golly, the potholes! Whether you're commuting or doing the school pick-up, everyone knows a pothole—or a dozen!—that fills them with dread. One man told me, 'Driving on the Melba Highway is a life-and-death journey, especially after dark and after rain.' There was reportedly a pothole as big as a bath on the Murray Valley Highway. Worse still were the potholes on the Hume Highway near Seymour, which blew tyres by the dozen. For my constituents travelling to Melbourne on the Hume for specialist medical treatment, this was the last thing they needed.</para>
<para>This budget did include funding for the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program to continue out to 2025-26. Again, I thank the minister for this commitment, but I'm hearing from local councils—flat out filling potholes—that they have no hope of fixing roads without a serious injection of funds from state and federal governments. Our road infrastructure needs review, and I'm pleased to be part of the Standing Committee on Regional Development, Infrastructure and Transport, where we plan to undertake such an inquiry.</para>
<para>The local councils responsible for building and maintaining road infrastructure are doing more with less. In Indi, our nine LGAs provide essential services with small rate bases and challenging geography. Because of this, they rely heavily on the Commonwealth's financial assistance grants. These untied grants allow councils to spend funds where it's most needed: on road maintenance; maintaining community assets like sporting grounds, libraries or pools; or new enabling infrastructure. These grants make up 42 per cent of the operating revenue for rural agricultural councils, according to the Australian Local Government Association. Yet, over the last three decades, grant payments have declined from one per cent of Commonwealth taxation revenue to around 0.53 per cent. At the same time, the demands on these councils have only increased. The number one ask from Indi's local governments, year in, year out, is to increase financial assistance grants. I took this request to the last government, and I was told that pigs flying was a likelier outcome.</para>
<para>Fast-forward six months, and I look across the chamber to a new government who committed in its national platform to focus on the long-term financial sustainability of local government, including fair increases to financial assistance grants. What is a fair increase? I would say that we start by restoring the grants to one per cent of federal tax revenue. This is the infrastructure funding that regions really need. I've been pleased to meet with the Assistant Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories, herself a former mayor from a regional community, to make this case. I truly hope that she can do better than the previous government on this issue. I'll be keeping the pressure up. I will continue with this, so that the infrastructure our local regional communes need is there for them to thrive.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Lalor for putting forward this motion. As a fellow Victorian MP, it is with great pleasure that I stand here to acknowledge and celebrate the fact that, for the first time in a decade, we have a federal government that delivers Victoria its fair share and the infrastructure that our communities need. It wasn't too long ago that we had a Treasurer who, despite being from Victoria, was not for Victoria. As the motion says, what we saw from the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government was a decade of neglect when it comes to Victoria. The previous Prime Minister was called the PM for Sydney—a well deserved moniker. Not only did Victoria miss out on infrastructure funding in budget after budget but we were also left out as New South Wales got much more vaccine stock than they needed, leaving Victoria and other states short—a record of being left behind. And who can forget the rorts? Pork-barrelling as far as the eye could see, the coloured spreadsheets, the commuter car parks—finally, after a decade, it's at an end.</para>
<para>The previous federal government's lack of support for Victoria was contrasted with the substantial and ongoing commitment of the Victorian government to communities right across the state, particularly in delivering important infrastructure projects. The Victorian government, with a lack of support from Canberra, went out and did it alone. As much as having a partner in Canberra to work with together on projects over the past decade would have helped our state, the Victorian government got on with the job anyway. Over eight years, we have seen so many great projects that I know have made a great difference to the lives of Victorians, including in Jagajaga.</para>
<para>Every day, I drive through Rosanna and under the rail bridge that used to be a level crossing. It's possible to forget that just a couple years ago things were very different there. There was a level crossing, and people spent a lot of time sitting at those boom gates at Lower Plenty Road where now they just drive on through. Projects like the removal of the Rosanna level crossing and the building of the new train station there have made a really big change to our community. They have created a welcoming connection on either side of the railway line; there's an excellent social enterprise cafe at the railway station there; and, as I said, time is saved from sitting at the level crossing. I'm so pleased and excited to see that the Andrews government has recently announced that the removal of the level crossing at Rutland Street in Macleod will be the next project, and that will happen over the next couple of years. As we've seen in Rosanna, I'm sure the Macleod project will deliver a great outcome for the community there—not least by resolving what is another traffic pitch point and making that a space that works for the whole community.</para>
<para>This is the real, tangible difference that Labor governments make. We've seen it at a state level and, now that we have a Labor government here in Canberra to partner with the states and territories, we see it at a federal level. We see how we can maximise the opportunities that exist for us to deliver the important community infrastructure we all need.</para>
<para>On the topic of rail, I'm very pleased to note the contribution of $2.2 billion from the Albanese government to the Suburban Rail Loop project. This is a really big project, but Melbourne is a big city—one that is only going to keep getting bigger. The Suburban Rail Loop will help meet the needs of Melbournians, connecting rail lines and eventually linking up to the airport line. I am sure this experience is replicated across Melbourne, but in communities like mine, people in the suburbs are looking for those connections. They are looking for the infrastructure work that makes their lives easier and makes it easier for them to get around. At the moment, Melbourne has a train system that's very much focused on getting in and out of the city. What the Suburban Rail Loop will get us is the potential to get around the city. While the initial phase of the project is focused on the east of Melbourne, I know there is very keen interest in my community in the north-east for future plans to build new stations at Doncaster, Heidelberg, Bundoora and beyond.</para>
<para>People in my community are looking for governments with vision, who get things done and who make a difference in their lives. We've got that in Victoria with the Andrews Labor government, and now we have that for Australia with the Albanese Labor government. Our government's first budget is just the beginning. There is still a lot of work to do to make sure we are investing in Victoria, in my community and in all Victorian communities. But I know that, in collaboration with the Victorian government, our government will get this work done.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Labor Party wants to tell us all that their budget funding will make journeys quicker and ensure that Australians return home to their families safely. Which part of cutting previously promised road projects in my electorate of Casey is achieving this? Which part of declining to improve road safety in bushfire-prone areas ensures that Australians return home to their families safely? Like always, the Labor Party is saying one thing and doing another.</para>
<para>Bipartisan agreement was reached in 2019 to upgrade Wellington Road. The Labor Party and the previous coalition government had committed to this important project that would see the duplication of the key bushfire escape route for those in towns in the Dandenong Ranges. But, no, the Labor Party have gone back on their word, with the local CFA labelling Labor's decision to cancel the project as 'really distressing news for our community'. The local council wants it, stakeholders want it, the CFA wants it and the coalition wants it—even the Labor Party wanted it—but it was cut anyway. The Labor Party felt that there were more important things to try and achieve over the safety of Casey's constituents. Instead, in the Treasurer 's budget last month, he committed $2.2 billion to Victoria's Suburban Rail Loop without submitting the funding to an independent assessment by Infrastructure Australia. Many opposite have spoken about this project, but they failed to mention that it hasn't gone through Infrastructure Australia. It's quite puzzling, because I recall that in March now Prime Minister Albanese said in his budget reply speech:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Labor will make sure that those investments really stack up, using the Infrastructure Australia model that I established …</para></quote>
<para>Like always, like his $275 power bill promise, this is another example of the Prime Minister saying one thing to get elected and another when in government.</para>
<para>This project, according to Victoria's Parliamentary Budget Office, is expected to blow out to more than $125 billion before its completion in 2085, and we now hear that it's going to the north as well. Even the Auditor-General has criticised the lack of detail in this proposal. Ripping up plans for investments in roads, rail, bridges, dams and community infrastructure facilities is not how we build a more prosperous, stronger and sustainable Australia. Investments in infrastructure are a key plank in growing the Australian economy, but this budget has no plan to grow our national economy. The Albanese government's first budget has distracted the majority of its so-called savings by axing or deferring infrastructure projects across the nation, including the Wellington Road duplication. It is easy to save if you get nothing done, and this is what the Albanese government is trying to tell us—that by cutting vital road and rail projects that would get Australians home to their families sooner and safer the economy is suddenly better off.</para>
<para>In 2019, vital infrastructure projects in Casey were funded by the federal coalition government, including the Canterbury Road duplication and the Killara Road and Station Street intersection upgrade. These investments are needed in our communities and, three years later, Casey residents are still waiting for the state government to get on with the job and start these projects. These projects are now at risk of not being delivered by the Andrews Labor government. These projects and upgrades are not just a matter of convenience but a matter of safety. Labor's decision is more evidence that they don't care as much about Victorians in local communities as they say they do. So I will keep fighting for upgrades for Casey, even as the federal and state Labor governments avoid collaboration on these projects. I'm saddened that the Labor Party's failings are being felt by my constituents already in this manner. I am saddened that a bipartisanship agreement has been rescinded. It's another example of this Labor government and this Prime Minister playing politics with our community. Once again, they say one thing to get elected, whether it's the promise of $275 power bills, a commitment to the Wellington Road duplication or the commitment to getting real wages growing when this budget has shown they're not; this government says one thing in opposition and breaks its word in government. It's a disgrace and it lets down all Australians.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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 day of sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Taxation</title>
          <page.no>19</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the Government's Budget gives billionaires and politicians a $9,000 a year tax cut but delays cost of living relief for everyday people; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) calls on the Government to scrap the stage three tax cuts that cost the public over a quarter of a trillion dollars, and instead spend this money providing immediate cost of living relief, through measures such as getting dental and mental health into Medicare and making childcare free.</para></quote>
<para>There are many words I could use to describe the recent budget, some of which would likely get me thrown out of this chamber. But one that keeps coming to mind is 'demoralising'. After this recent election, I, like a lot of people, felt something I hadn't felt for some time: hope—hope about the future. But with this budget the government seems to be actively trying to crush people's hope, to demoralise people.</para>
<para>It's clear to everyone that we're headed for tough times, with inflation on essentials like we haven't seen for decades, unprecedented spikes in rent, rapid mortgage rises not seen since the nineties, energy bills set to jump 50 per cent, fuel costs continuing go through the roof and wages continuing to stagnate. This budget, despite being accompanied by great rhetoric, offers nothing to meaningfully address any of these issues. People will be worse off with this budget.</para>
<para>Since the budget, my team and I have had the chance to chat to a lot of locals in Ryan. At a doorknock we held in Upper Kedron last weekend, the mood was palpable. People are all worried about the cost of living rising, but they're giving up on the government helping. They think the major parties are as bad as each other, and their family will just have to suffer through it. Is this the kind of society we actually want—one where people are just resigned to their fate? That's what the current budget achieves.</para>
<para>Part of what is so demoralising about this budget is that, while people are getting no relief on their energy bills, Labor is going ahead with handing out over $9,000 a year in tax cuts for politicians and billionaires. While the government are pursuing a housing policy that will see the need for public housing increase, they're spending over a quarter of a trillion—a quarter of a trillion—dollars in tax cuts, the bulk of which will go to the wealthy. So, while the government refuse to offer meaningful support for people struggling, they are going ahead with these stage 3 tax cuts that actually turbocharge inequality and destroy our progressive tax system.</para>
<para>I don't want to sound all doom and gloom. There are solutions, but they require a little courage, and they're far from radical or impossible. They're all policies that have been implemented overseas or even in Australia's not-too-distant past. Capping energy bills; bringing dental and mental health into Medicare, and guaranteeing people can see a bulk-billing GP; implementing free child care for everyone; making public transport cheap or even free; raising the pension and lowering the retirement age; building enough public homes so that no-one is without a stable place to live—they're all actually achievable right now, and, combined, they would transform the lives of just about every Australian for the better.</para>
<para>Labor talks about not wanting to break election promises as an excuse to continue with these absurd cuts. Well, you either break the promise to back the stage 3 tax cuts or you break the promise to look after all Australians—the promise of a better future. You just can't do both. You either scrap these tax cuts and spend that money on helping people, or you keep tax cuts for the megarich and leave everyday people to fall behind.</para>
<para>I want to conclude with a point that I think is often overlooked in this discussion. There are plenty of people in my electorate of Ryan who earn over $180,000 who also want the stage 3 tax cuts gone. They understand that plugging that quarter of a trillion dollars into reducing inequality is more valuable to them than receiving an extra $9,000 that they actually don't need. They understand that invested in public services and support is good for everybody. What good is an extra $9,000 to someone on $210,000, when kids end up trapped in poverty and our society loses the opportunity to develop our amazing talents to the fullest? What good is that extra money when the government doesn't invest in reducing emissions and in building infrastructure to prepare us for climate change? Australians understand that a more equal society benefits everyone. The Labor government would do well to remember that too.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Bates</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This motion offers the wrong prescription for immediate cost-of-living relief. First, this motion inaccurately makes the assertion that adjusting the stage 3 tax cuts would provide immediate cost-of-living relief. These tax cuts are not due to come in until 1 July 2024. They're already legislated and are incorporated into the budget. This motion, in suggesting that a tweak to those tax cuts would provide people with benefits in the intervening period, is making assertions about the way budgets work that are not correct. So the core element of this motion is an inaccurate reflection and should've been rephrased if this motion was going to be focused on cost of living.</para>
<para>Second, this motion suggests the wrong overarching approach given where we find the current economy. In its last budget the government suggests a three-pronged approach. First, it is to provide targeted and meaningful cost-of-living relief. We're responsible but not reckless, because we want to provide cost-of-living relief in a way that doesn't make battling inflation harder. Second, it targets investments in a stronger, more resilient, more modern economy. And, third, it begins the hard yards of budget repair.</para>
<para>Let's focus on the first of those prongs: providing targeted and immediate cost-of-living relief. As the Treasurer has said, reducing inflation is the No. 1 macroeconomic priority at this point. That is the dragon that we need to slay. Inflation is insidious. It harms people on low and fixed incomes the most. As Keynes said, 'There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society and the economy. If not dealt with, it can become entrenched.' The way to deal with inflation is not to spray cash around in a way that would make the RBA's job of bringing down inflation harder. That would actually hurt the very people that we are trying to help. What the government has done, when it comes to this first prong of our strategy, providing meaningful cost-of-living relief, is firstly to make fair and responsible structural improvements to the tax base, and, secondly, a five-point cost-of-living relief plan.</para>
<para>The government's structural improvements to the tax base include implementing our election commitments to ensure that multinationals pay their fair share of tax by limiting tax deductions. We are holding large companies to account through transparency. The multinational tax integrity tax package will produce around $1 billion over the forward estimates. In addition, we are extending a number of existing ATO compliance programs. By taking stronger action on tax compliance through this package the government will improve its tax position by $3.7 billion over the forward estimates. Together, the tax measures introduced in this budget are estimated to improve the budget bottom line by $6.5 billion over the four years from 2022 to 2023.</para>
<para>Of course, over the longer term there is more work to be done. As the Treasurer and the Prime Minister have indicated, there is a conversation to be had. But this is a material and meaningful step and one that is appropriate given the scale of the challenge that we face. In conjunction with that, in conjunction with a measured and meaningful improvement in the tax base, this government has put in place a number of cost-of-living measures that are targeted, that are affordable, that have a meaningful impact on those most affected and that will not put extra pressure on inflation.</para>
<para>They include making child care more affordable for more than 1.2 million families. They include cutting the cost of medicines for around 3.6 million Australians—the largest reduction in costs for the PBS in decades. They include expanding the Paid Parental Leave scheme to reach 26 weeks in July 2026. They include a housing accord that will be a long-term strategy for massively boosting social and affordable housing. And they include getting wages moving again. Getting wages moving has been the first and, I would argue, the most significant short-term and immediate means by which we have provided cost-of-living relief to the most vulnerable—a 5.2 per cent increase in the minimum wage, a significant increase in pay for aged-care workers which is long, long overdue.</para>
<para>This government is putting in place measures that are targeted, that will not add to inflationary pressure and that are the right measures for the economy.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATES</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Poverty charges interest. There is perhaps no greater example of this in our healthcare system than a visit to the dentist. If you can't afford a filling today you will need to pay thousands of dollars more for a root canal in six months time—and I know this because of very recent lived experience. Earlier this year I noticed a toothache. I got an appointment at the local dentist and was told I needed a root canal on the problem tooth and a filling on another one. I knew this was going to be very expensive, even with private healthcare cover, which itself is a substantial expense on a former retail worker's wage. And expensive it was: around $3,000. My other option: have the tooth pulled out at a fraction of the cost. I sat in the dentist's chair thinking that my income and savings were about to decide whether or not I was able to keep my teeth in my head.</para>
<para>I'm not alone in this experience. Stories like this are true for countless Australians. People are forced to choose between raiding their savings and keeping their teeth. The problem tooth was so painful that I decided I had to address it first and leave the filling until I could save up enough money again. Flash forward to July and I go back to the dentist. I now have the funds to get the filling done, but I am told it's too late. In the absence of proper treatment, what was originally just a filling had now turned into another root canal. If I had the funds to have paid for both procedures up-front I would have saved myself money but, as a result of the barriers on my income, what should have been a cheaper procedure turned into another $3,000 one, all because I did not have the funds at the time that I needed them. The only reason I was able to afford a second root canal was being elected to this place. If I had not seen an increase in my income I would now be missing this tooth. This is a reality that Australians face every single day.</para>
<para>Medicare should not stop at your teeth, and economic class should not be a barrier to essential dental health care. It should not take getting elected to parliament for Australians to be able to afford the most basic healthcare services. Everyone in this country should be entitled to health care, including dental care, as a fundamental right.</para>
<para>The Greens were able to secure free dental care for kids under Medicare back in 2012, and it's time for a Labor government to work with us again to provide this vital healthcare service to all Australians regardless of their age. It is estimated that each year roughly 40 per cent of Australians skip going to the dentist because of the cost. Poor oral health doesn't just lead to tooth decay; it also leads to serious or even life-threatening infections, an increased risk of heart disease and complications with pregnancy. These consequences mean more trips to hospitals, putting even further pressure on our already overburdened and underfunded hospital system.</para>
<para>In fact, the Australian Dental Association has estimated that the avoidable costs to our country of poor oral health exceed $800 million each year. With pressure on our hospital system, costs of living spiralling out of control and many Australians in regional and rural areas not even being able to access public dental care, bringing dental care into Medicare is the path forward.</para>
<para>The independent Parliamentary Budget Office costed the Greens policy of bringing dental care into Medicare at $77 billion over the next decade. This figure absolutely pales in comparison with the $254 billion being given away through the stage 3 tax cuts. It is estimated that the top one per cent of earners in this country will reap at least 65 per cent of the wealth from these tax cuts. Meanwhile, middle and working class Australians are told, yet again, that the government just can't afford to make their lives easier. Well, we can afford it. It simply involves a shift in priorities: to value access to essential healthcare services over the need for further tax cuts to the wealthy.</para>
<para>Bringing dental care into Medicare would be a once in a generation reform that would give millions of Australians access to quality and affordable—even bulk-billed—dental care. It would be a legacy that has the potential to dramatically improve the lives of people across this country regardless of their background—to put more money into their wallets to spend on themselves and their families. It would create a truly universal healthcare system. Your bank balance should not determine how many of your teeth you get to keep. It is well beyond time that we ditch the stage 3 tax cuts and bring dental into Medicare.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak against this motion moved by the member for Ryan to repeal the legislated stage 3 tax cuts. Make no mistake, any decision to reverse the stage 3 tax cuts would impact millions of Australians—in fact, it would impact more than 59,000 Australians in the member's own electorate of Ryan. I'm sure there are some very strong feelings about that there. The stage 3 tax cuts mean the vast majority of Australians will keep at least 70c of every dollar they earn. Upon full implementation of the plan we legislated in government, around 95 per cent of taxpayers are expected to face a marginal tax rate of no more than 30 per cent, so it's sending a really strong signal to Australians to get out there, build businesses, build careers, take risks and have a go. You couldn't send a clearer signal: 70c in the dollar. Of course, if they do, they can use that simple rule of thumb for those earning between $45,000 and $200,000, and they're going to keep that 70c in the dollar.</para>
<para>The stage 3 tax cuts deliver to all individuals earning more than $45,000. They weren't introduced in isolation—this is very important to understand—they're part of a broader legislated tax package that, when fully implemented, will deliver income tax relief for 12.5 million Australians. That in total would mean: a hairdresser earning $60,000 would pay $1,455 less in tax every year from 1 January 2024; a teacher earning $70,000 would pay $1,705 less; an executive assistant earning $80,000 would pay $1,955 less in tax every year from mid-2024; a research scientist on $90,000 would pay $2,340 less; and a qualified diesel mechanic earning $100,000 would pay $3,040 less in tax from the middle of 2024.</para>
<para>We know that the Australian Greens have never supported these tax cuts. To be fair to the Greens, at least they have been consistent, unlike the Labor Party. Labor went to the last election with an ironclad commitment. In their election platform they said, 'We will deliver the legislated stage 3 tax cuts.' It's on page 11, for those wanting to check. It is there in black and white. The Prime Minister and the Treasurer told Australians these tax cuts would be delivered. They said it in the lead-up to the last election—no asterisks, no footnotes, no fine print. It was an ironclad commitment. But we've seen over the recent weeks a lot of kite flying from those opposite on this issue, and it should concern all Australians that the Labor government has lost interest in this pledge.</para>
<para>It has lost interest in this pledge, and we know from interviews with the Treasurer before the budget that this discussion is being led with the Prime Minister's support. At this point, it seems like it's only a matter of time until the Treasurer starts unwinding the stage 3 tax cuts, finding a way to ditch the next election commitment on their long list of election commitments that they are trying to get rid of. But it's important to remember it is legislated. It's also important to remember that, over the coming years, as we battle inflation and high interest rates, we also need to set up the economy for longer-term growth. We need to make sure that the supply side of the economy is strong, and, of course, that will help to address inflation.</para>
<para>Sadly, what we saw in the budget was deficits getting wider and $115 billion in extra spending, the exact opposite of what we need in order to battle inflation and rising interest rates. In fact, we know that this has left the Reserve Bank carrying the can to reduce the impact of inflation through higher interest rates. Sadly, any move to walk away from these stage 3 tax cuts will be a broken promise of incredible magnitude. If they do, we will hold them to account. There is no greater marker of values in this term of parliament than what will happen to taxes.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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 day of sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>22</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Lifting the Income Limit for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card) Bill 2022, Supply Bill (No. 3) 2022-2023, Supply Bill (No. 4) 2022-2023, Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2022-2023</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r6877" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Lifting the Income Limit for the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card) Bill 2022</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r6938" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Supply Bill (No. 3) 2022-2023</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r6939" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Supply Bill (No. 4) 2022-2023</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r6937" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2022-2023</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Assent</title>
            <page.no>22</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care Amendment (Implementing Care Reform) Bill 2022, Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (AFP Powers and Other Matters) Bill 2022, Treasury Laws Amendment (More Competition, Better Prices) Bill 2022, Australian Human Rights Commission Legislation Amendment (Selection and Appointment) Bill 2022</title>
          <page.no>22</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <p>
              <a href="r6874" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Aged Care Amendment (Implementing Care Reform) Bill 2022</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r6898" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (AFP Powers and Other Matters) Bill 2022</span>
                </p>
              </a>
              <a href="r6923" type="Bill">
                <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                  <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Treasury Laws Amendment (More Competition, Better Prices) Bill 2022</span>
                </p>
              </a>
            </p>
            <a href="r6884" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Australian Human Rights Commission Legislation Amendment (Selection and Appointment) Bill 2022</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Returned from Senate</title>
            <page.no>22</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>23</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Electoral Matters Joint Committee</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Appointment</title>
            <page.no>23</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Speaker has received a message from the Senate informing the House in relation to the variation of the resolution of appointment of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation Joint Select Committee</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Membership</title>
            <page.no>23</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Speaker has received a message from the Senate informing the House of the appointment of senators as participating members of the Joint Select Committee on National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation. As the list of appointments is a lengthy one, I do not propose to read the list to the House. Details will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>23</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Legislation Amendment (Medicare Compliance and Other Measures) Bill 2022</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="s1345" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Health Legislation Amendment (Medicare Compliance and Other Measures) Bill 2022</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>First Reading</title>
            <page.no>23</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022</title>
          <page.no>23</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r6916" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Report from Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>23</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo></subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>23</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TINK</name>
    <name.id>300124</name.id>
    <electorate>North Sydney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The reforms in the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill are warmly welcomed and long overdue. As members of the 47th Parliament, however, we must recognise this reform is actually a small first step in what needs to be a much larger and broader reform of the human rights legislative framework in Australia.</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report completed by the Australian Human Rights Commission in March 2020 indisputably found the current legal and regulatory system in Australia is inadequate to deal with the prevalence and pervasiveness of workplace sexual harassment. At the outset, I want to sincerely thank all the victims, survivors and everyone who bravely shared their stories to inform this important work.</para>
<para>With one-third of workers reportedly experiencing sexual harassment, the Respect@Work review was a long and thorough process, finally bringing to light what many women have known to be true for decades: we need to do better in workplaces right around the country. To do this, we must shift the emphasis of the burden of responsibility from the potentially vulnerable individual to the employer who ultimately controls the culture in their workplace.</para>
<para>The report noted that the financial, social, emotional, physical and psychological harm associated with sexual harassment is particularly borne by women, with gender inequality a key driver of behaviour. It also found sexual harassment represents a very real financial imposition to the economy through lost productivity, staff turnover and other associated impacts. It is estimated the total financial cost of workplace sexual harassment to the Australian economy was $3.8 billion annually—noting this was likely a conservative estimate—and that most of the costs associated with that lost productivity, approximately $1.8 billion worth of it, were borne by Australian businesses.</para>
<para>The bill before us is a good faith implementation of what is recommended in the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report as it seeks to prohibit conduct which subjects a person to a hostile work environment on the grounds of their sex, and places a positive duty on employers to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate unlawful discrimination based on sex. In what I think is a strong and positive development, the Human Rights Commission will also be empowered to conduct inquiries into systemic and unlawful discrimination and support businesses to make work environments in Australia a safer place.</para>
<para>As is the case in so many overdue reforms, however, it is only when we shine a light on a problem and start to work towards solutions that we end up uncovering other areas of concern that are equally important to address. Human rights in Australia, more broadly, is one such area. This bill provides vital reform to eliminate sexual harassment and gender based inequalities. At the same time, it highlights the patchwork of discrimination in human rights laws in play right across the country.</para>
<para>This piecemeal approach leads all of us as rights holders, and, in some instances, victims and survivors, on uncertain ground, feeding complexity and confusion for businesses and authorities. This is particularly true when you take into account the intersectional nature of discrimination. As the Australian Human Rights Commission's 2018 national survey report revealed, almost 40 per cent of women and just over 25 per cent of men have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace in the past five years. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are more likely to have experienced workplace sexual harassment than people who are non-Indigenous. This distorted experience is also the case for people with a disability or those from a racially diverse background.</para>
<para>Given this, while this legislation addresses the challenge from the filter of sex it does not, nor does it seek to, address discrimination across all protected characteristics. As Human Rights Commissioner Jenkins identified:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The introduction of these reforms in the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 specifically focused on sex discrimination and sexual harassment provides an invaluable pilot for broader reforms that are needed across all areas of federal discrimination law.</para></quote>
<para>In this context, I am very supportive of these reforms leading the way. For it to be its strongest, we must ensure we do not inadvertently weaken this legislation by pushing for amendments that, rather than strengthen it, spread it so thinly that its potency is lost.</para>
<para>The Human Rights Commission has developed a comprehensive reform agenda for our federal discrimination laws called 'Free and equal'. The paper supporting this agenda identifies a pressing need to shift the focus of the federal discrimination law system to a more preventative approach and towards actions that better support the fulfilment of rights. It is an important piece of work, the recommendations of which need to be actioned as a matter of urgency. I'm therefore calling on the Attorney-General to provide clarity as to what work the Labor government is doing more broadly in the area of human rights policy. The Labor Party has long promised a human rights framework that is fit for purpose, accessible and promotes equality, and the parliament deserves to know a time frame for this work.</para>
<para>I am pleased the objectives of this bill will be supported by some additional funding to the Human Rights Commission; however, having reviewed this funding allocation and looking at the broad scope of work the Australian Human Rights Commission must do, I do not believe the amount is adequate. Like many independent statutory authorities over the last decade, under previous governments, the Human Rights Commission has been hollowed out in what can only be seen as an attempt to lessen its impact or punish it for adverse reports.</para>
<para>As noted by the Kingsford Legal Centre at the University of New South Wales, compliance notices will be the main way positive duties are enforced and will be the driving force behind cultural and legal change. But the commission's ability to issue compliance orders and process complaints may be delayed without increased funding. I also support funding being made available for community legal services, to ensure free and independent legal advice is available to applicants. On behalf of the people of North Sydney, then, I'll be watching closely to ensure additional functions and areas of responsibility are properly funded.</para>
<para>There are some amendments, which have been circulated, to the bill that I will now touch on briefly. The amendments presented by the member for Wentworth relate to the inclusion of protections for people who identify as LGBTQI+. The bill in its current form prohibits conduct that subjects another person to a workplace environment that is hostile on the grounds of sex. However, this does not cover all attributes protected by the Sex Discrimination Act, such as discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity and/or intersex status. The amendment proposed by the member for Wentworth seeks to expand the hostile work environment provisions and the positive duty provisions to cover hostility on the grounds of sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, marital or relationship status, pregnancy, breastfeeding and/or family responsibilities. I support this amendment and thank the member for Wentworth for moving it.</para>
<para>The amendment moved by the member for Kooyong relates to the cost provisions. Recommendation 25 of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report provides that the Australian Human Right Commission Act be amended to insert a cost protection provision consistent with section 570 of the Fair Work Act 2009. This cost model is as outlined in the Australian Human Rights Commission's 2021 <inline font-style="italic">Free & Equal</inline> position paper. The benefit of this model for access to justice is that it will apply to all Commonwealth antidiscrimination law, providing a clear and certain approach in which parties are responsible for their own costs. With that said, a judge will continue to have the power to intervene and make a different costs award.</para>
<para>I look forward to assessing the pros and cons of other cost models in the context of a broader strengthening and harmonisation of our discrimination laws. I would support a wider consultation with a longer time frame on a cost model which might allow applicants to claim costs against respondents in a wider range of circumstances or other models.</para>
<para>The amendments moved by the member for Berowra relate to the role of the Fair Work Ombudsman and, while I can recognise the position that the member is advocating for, having sought broader opinion, I am comfortable, and I agree with the Australian Human Rights Commission, that they are the most appropriate statutory body to deliver a trauma-informed inquiry function.</para>
<para>Finally, the amendments moved by the member for Warringah clarify the objects of the act and posit that it would be stronger if language referring to men and women were replaced with gender-neutral language. I support this amendment.</para>
<para>Australia was once at the forefront of tackling sexual harassment globally. More than 35 years on, the rate of change has been disappointingly slow. Australia has been lagging other countries in preventing and responding to sexual harassment. I hope that this bill brings us back to the fore and that, as a parliament, we continue the important work of keeping us at the front of the pack.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
    <electorate>Macnamara</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I appreciate all of my colleagues coming in to listen to my speech. I'm glad the SMS went around and they all answered that, whenever I rise, they must rush into this place to hear the prose and the contribution. But this is a really important piece of legislation that I commend the Attorney-General on for his work of bringing it to the House, and I commend everybody who has contributed to this Respect at Work piece of legislation.</para>
<para>This is a bill where we owe a lot to the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins, who has taken on the really significant task for our country of tackling what really are, in many ways, cultural issues in the workplace. Something that I think we were all astonished to find is that up to a third of women in this country experience some form of sexual harassment in the workplace—up to a third. It really is quite breathtaking when you stop and think about that and about what that means for our colleagues, what that means for our counterparts and what that means for Australian women. Commissioner Jenkins's work to look at the issues and to look at how we tackle this as a country has been profound and it has been powerful, and we thank her for that work.</para>
<para>This bill tackles a range of things which, depending on how long I have, I will go into. But I want to read something that Commissioner Jenkins has said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The current legal and regulatory system is simply no longer fit for purpose. In this report—</para></quote>
<para>the inquiry report—</para>
<quote><para class="block">I have recommended a new model that improves the coordination, consistency and clarity between the antidiscrimination, employment and work health and safety legislative schemes.</para></quote>
<para>Earlier in the report she said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Workplace sexual harassment is not inevitable. It is not acceptable. It is preventable.</para></quote>
<para>Commissioner Jenkins concluded by saying:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… the rate of change has been disappointingly slow. Australia now lags behind other countries in preventing and responding to sexual harassment.</para></quote>
<para>Unfortunately, the legislative scheme that we inherited from the previous government wasn't enough; it needed to be upgraded and updated. I think this is something that's also shared across the parliament. I think that the 47th Parliament brings with it a new sense of focus and a new sense of constructiveness—hopefully. But I also remember the cultural moment that our country faced in the previous parliament, when this building was under the most intense spotlight for all the wrong reasons. This was a moment being presented to this country, the Prime Minister and this parliament by the women of Australia. It was an extremely powerful moment, standing outside this place and hearing the likes of Brittany Higgins and others speaking in a way that was one of the most extraordinary speeches I've ever heard in this precinct.</para>
<para>I remember sitting on the other side of the chamber, hearing what was a predetermined address for question time—a pre-planned address in question time, not one of the impromptu addresses but something that the Prime Minister had prepared coming into question time. He said that in other places around the world such marches are met with bullets, and that the women of Australia should be glad that that isn't the case here. Not only was that disturbing because it was a preprepared remark, which had obviously been considered by the former Prime Minister and his office, but it was also just so tone deaf and so wrong in its content. Even off the cuff it would have been completely unacceptable. This bill and Commissioner Jenkins sought to change that completely incorrect and off-putting remark into something far more powerful and productive. The report by Commissioner Jenkins was commenced and this bill seeks to respond to it.</para>
<para>One of the key recommendations by the commissioner is about—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Wells</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's nearly time—</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>To finish?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Wells</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Approaching.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On approach. I was just building up to the best part of the speech! But as the Prime Minister is coming into the chamber, I will just make a couple of very short closing remarks. This has been the subject of a lot of work by people in order to make changes in this country, and is something that is desperately needed. This is about reform that will last and will be meaningful, and reform that will make Australian workplaces safer. This is reform that I am proud that this Labor government has brought to this House and it's reform which will change lives and make our workplaces safer. I thank Commissioner Jenkins and I thank those who have contributed to this bill.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I believe very firmly that there are some basic yardsticks by which any civilised society should measure itself. One of those is that everyone has the right to a safe and respectful workplace. And yet, here we are, nearly a quarter of the way through the 21st century and still working towards this goal. The fact that workplaces have not been safe or respectful for so many Australians is simply unacceptable, as is the fact that the previous government dismissed this goal as 'impractical' and not worth striving for—that what we had was somehow good enough. It was not, and it is not. That is what this legislation seeks to address.</para>
<para>That's why Labor campaigned on a promise to implement in full every single one of the recommendations in the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work </inline>report into sexual harassment in Australian workplaces. And that is why, shortly after I had the honour of being sworn in as Prime Minister, I reiterated that this election promise was now a key part of the agenda of the new government. We owe a great debt of gratitude to everyone who stepped up to share their experiences with Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins, especially the survivors who did so at great emotional cost. It certainly can't have been easy to relive some of those moments and put difficult memories into words. But, because of their courage, we now have a map towards a better future. We promise to follow that map.</para>
<para>The Australian people can be confident that they now have a government that sticks to our plans. The Australian people put their faith in us, and we'll deliver on the commitments that we gave, including this legislation. Since the election less than six months ago, we have not wasted a day. We have fulfilled our promise to establish family and domestic violence leave, because no woman should have to choose between her job and her safety. We are acting on our commitments to build more affordable housing for women and children fleeing violence, including the $100 million that we allocated in the budget for emergency housing. We know that tonight, like every night, tragically in Australia a woman, sometimes a woman with her children, will be turned away from emergency shelters because there simply isn't anywhere for them to go. We know that they're likely to spend the night in a park or in a car or on a friend's couch. We can do so much better in 2022, and we're obligated to do so. We're acting on the commitment that we made—and it's funded in the budget—for an additional 500 frontline workers to support women as they make these courageous and often difficult transitions. We're acting on our commitment to introduce cheaper child care and early education, and we're fulfilling another commitment with the introduction of this legislation.</para>
<para>In short, this bill will strengthen laws to help prevent sexual harassment. Why do we need to do it? Well, it should be obvious that everyone does have a right to a safe and a respectful workplace. The government is acting to help put an end to sexual harassment in Australian workplaces. Let's take a look at some uncomfortable facts. Over the past five years, one in three people experienced sexual harassment at work, with women experiencing higher rates of harassment than men. Time and time again it is women who bear the brunt. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, people with a disability and members of the LGBTQ + community are also, on average, more likely to experience workplace sexual harassment. No-one should have to suffer stress or anxiety because they feel uncomfortable or unsafe at work. No-one should have to leave their job and lose their income or disrupt their career because they're being harassed. Along with all the human costs in terms of physical and mental health, there is also an economic cost of sexual harassment. This has been estimated to be close to $4 billion ever year.</para>
<para>The former government sat on the Jenkins report for almost a year without responding to the recommendations, and then, of course, they refused to implement many of the key recommendations. In parliament in 2021 the then government and now those opposite voted against Labor's amendments to introduce a positive duty on employers to eliminate sexual harassment. Dwell on that for a moment: a positive duty to eliminate sexual harassment. It was a step too far for some. In spite of the very clear recommendations of the Jenkins report, they voted against it. They voted against prohibiting sexual harassment under our workplace laws, voted against protecting victims amassing massive legal bills when they tried to seek justice, voted against making substantive equality between women and men the objective of the Sex Discrimination Act and voted against allowing unions and other organisations to bring legal action on behalf of victims.</para>
<para>Nothing exemplified the former government's failures as clearly as its response to the Women's March4Justice. Many people from across the chamber, and certainly many of my colleagues, walked the very short distance out to the front of Parliament House on that day. What we saw was women of different generations responding—not just here, of course, but around the country—and saying, as the banner showed, 'Enough is enough!' and that it was actually time for people to be heard. And that day we heard a truth that we all needed to hear. Afterwards, in the chamber here, we had a bit of a debate. I'll never forget it. The then Prime Minister suggested that we give ourselves a pat on the back as a nation because the protest was not met with bullets! It was quite an extraordinary moment. As I said at the time, the government had not so much a tin ear as a wall of concrete.</para>
<para>It's no wonder, given that that was the attitude, that Australia during the term of the former government fell to 70th in the world for women's economic participation and opportunity. When government changed in 2013 we went from being the 24th most equal country in the world—for equality between women and men—to the 50th. We know that, across the country, too many working women are underappreciated, underpaid and disrespected. This is an issue for over half of the country, for women, but it is also an issue for the nation as a whole because we're all held back as a nation when we don't value and create the opportunity for all of us, men and women, to participate fully in our economy and in our society.</para>
<para>On 21 May, Australians voted to change this. They voted to support all of the key recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report, and we're continuing to work across government, with business and others, to ensure that all of these recommendations are implemented. This bill will implement key legislative changes recommended by Commissioner Jenkins that were left unfinished by the former government. It will place a positive duty on employers to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate sex discrimination, sexual harassment and victimisation as far as possible. It will give the Australian Human Rights Commission new powers to enforce that positive duty, to help make sure employers are meeting their obligations. It will expressly prohibit conduct that results in a hostile workplace environment on the basis of gender. It will ensure Commonwealth public sector organisations are also required to report to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency on its gender equality indicators.</para>
<para>In addition, the government has introduced amendments to the Fair Work Act in the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022 to prohibit sexual harassment under our workplace relations laws, making it clear that sexual harassment is a serious workplace issue. The amendments to the Fair Work Act also include an additional pathway for affected workers to obtain quick and effective assistance from the Fair Work Commission. Those changes, along with the bill before us today, are a key part of our mission to progress gender equality across all our work as a government. Its passage will move Australia forward in our efforts to prevent workplace sexual harassment from happening in the first place.</para>
<para>Our budget last month, with its investment in child care and paid parental leave, represented Australia's biggest ever investment in women's economic equality. With this bill, we recognise that achieving women's economic equality includes making sure that women are safe at work. We must never accept that sexual harassment is somehow either inevitable or unavoidable. It is anything but. Nor should we be tempted by the dangerous fiction that somehow we are not capable of improvement. We are. Let's make these changes and move forward with our national story.</para>
<para>I said during the campaign, consistently, that we do live in the greatest nation on earth, and I certainly believe that. But an even greater nation is within our reach. The greater nation is one that values our people across the spectrum, men and women, and that provides opportunity that supports equality. Thanks to the courage of every victim-survivor who has stepped forward, we have no reason not to provide support to them and to acknowledge their courage by supporting this legislation. These people have shown the way. It is something that we should all embrace as part of the determination that we share to shape Australia into the very best version that we can be, a nation that reflects our highest ideals. I know that together we can build a better future, one with equality and respect at its core. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am pleased to speak in support of the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022. Every worker should be free of discrimination of all types, and implementing the recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report honours that promise we made to the Australian people during the election. The bill will significantly strengthen and clarify the legal and regulatory framework relating to sexual harassment in Australia. It also introduces a positive duty for employers and persons conducting a business or undertaking to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate sexual harassment as far as possible.</para>
<para>The Australian Human Rights Commission released the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report on 5 March 2020. Based on the findings of the national inquiry into sexual harassment in Australian workplaces, this was a pivotal moment in shining a light on the extent of the sexual harassment in our workplaces. The national inquiry found 33 per cent of people who had been in the workforce for the last five years had experienced workplace sexual harassment. As a former union organiser, I am very aware of the impacts this type harassment can have on a worker, particularly when they have little to no support from management or HR. These experiences can leave a workers scarred, in more ways than one, for many years if they do not receive support or their employer has inadequate policies in place. I am pleased that important pillars of the union movement, namely the Shop, Distributive and Allied Employees Association and the Community and Public Sector Union, were engaged in the consultation process for this bill.</para>
<para>A key reform contained in this bill concerns the implementation of recommendation 17 from the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report. The result will be placing the onus on employers to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate unlawful discrimination, including sexual harassment, to the furthest extent possible. Employers will be required to work alongside their staff in ensuring, to the best of their ability, that their workplaces are safe from discrimination. To ensure workers and employers are supported in this task, the Australian Human Rights Commission will prepare and publish guidelines for compliance with the positive duty. It will also be equipped with appropriate compliance powers to enforce this positive duty. This will transfer the responsibility from victims of discrimination and harassment to those who are equipped to prevent it: employers.</para>
<para>Another way in this bill will support workers is by amending the objects clause of the Sex Discrimination Act. The amendment clause will state that the object of this act is to achieve substantive equality between men and women. It will state that an objective of this act is to eliminate, so far as possible, discrimination involving workplace environments that are hostile on the grounds of sex. To further support victims of discrimination, there will be a change in the timeframe for when a complaint under antidiscrimination law may be lodged. The change from six months to twenty-four months will provide victims with sufficient time to consider the best course of action and level the playing field to ensure everyone has an equal opportunity to seek justice.</para>
<para>The president of the commission will also retain discretionary power not to be required to terminate a complaint for any matter that occurred more than 24 months before the complaint was lodged. That discretionary power is an important last line of support for victims. Given my previous role as a union official, I know how hard it is for people to make formal complaints on sensitive matters such as these, particularly in a timely manner. For many, it can take multiple years of support before they feel comfortable to confront the dark memories that are brought to the surface when raising these matters in a legal format.</para>
<para>Furthermore, through this bill, the government will insert a costs protection provision into the Australian Human Rights Commission Act, which will provide greater certainty to potential applicants as to the cost of the legal action. This action is a direct response to the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@Wo</inline><inline font-style="italic">rk</inline> report's finding that concerns about adverse costs orders deter applicants from seeking to resolve complaints through the courts. Importantly, the costs reform model is supported by the Australian Human Rights Commission in its 2021 <inline font-style="italic">Free and Equal</inline> position paper. These reforms will apply to applications under the Commonwealth antidiscrimination law. This balanced approach helps to equalise the scales for those seeking to make a complaint by removing as many barriers as possible so that complaints can be heard without fear of financial ruin if unsuccessful.</para>
<para>The passage of this bill would see the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@Wo</inline><inline font-style="italic">rk</inline> report's recommendations fully implemented in the way they were originally intended—something the previous government refused to do. The suite of reforms contained within this bill is crucial for ensuring safer and respectful workplaces for all Australians. The bill's provisions serve to streamline and clarify antidiscrimination laws in our country whilst increasing our support for workers and equipping employers with the tools they need to ensure their workplaces are as safe as possible. My many years on the shop floor spent representing and supporting my former members on these very issues have given me the insight to know that the reforms contained in this bill are not only necessary for, but essential to, proactively stopping the scourge of sexual harassment and discrimination before it rears its ugly head.</para>
<para>I commend this bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GEORGANAS</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
    <electorate>Adelaide</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of this important bill. Respect at work is a right that every person should have, and this bill addresses that. The Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022 represents a significant step forward in implementing the government's commitment to preventing sexual harassment at the workplace.</para>
<para>We have committed to fully implementing the recommendations in the landmark <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@Wo</inline><inline font-style="italic">rk</inline> report. That is an important first step. I say that because I believe that, as a country, we have dropped the ball on this issue. We were once regarded as being at the forefront of tackling sexual harassment globally. States including my home state of South Australia, New South Wales and Victoria enacted antidiscrimination laws covering the ground of sexual harassment in the late 1970s. However, the report finds that, in Australia over the past 35 years, the rate of change has been disappointingly slow, and that is not a good sign. Australia now lags behind other countries in preventing, and responding to, sexual harassment.</para>
<para>The Australian Human Rights Commission found that sexual harassment in Australian workplaces is widespread. In its 2018 survey, it found that one in three people had experienced sexual harassment at work in the past five years. That is totally unacceptable. When you think about that, those numbers are enormous. We also found that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were found to be even more likely to have experienced workplace sexual harassment. It's up to us to stand up and demand that we as a nation do better. We must. Workplace sexual harassment is not inevitable. It is not acceptable, full stop, and it is preventable. We are all responsible for creating safe, gender-equal and inclusive workplaces—in all workplaces. This is why we are so supportive of this bill.</para>
<para>This bill will significantly strength and clarify the legal and regulatory frameworks relating to sexual harassment in Australia. In particular, the bill introduces a positive duty on employers and business owners. In addition, the bill will amend the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 and the Workplace Gender Equality Act 2012. This is important because the commission and the act need to have the capability of enforcing and ensuring these changes in the workplace. It will also provide the commission with a broad ability to inquire into systematic unlawful discrimination.</para>
<para>We are committed to ensuring that Australia gets back to being the leading force on equality and wiping out workplace sexual harassment. We don't want any Australian being held back because of gender or any other form of discrimination. This is why this government is investing $7 billion to drive gender equality. It is also why we are delivering cheaper child care for 96 per cent of Australian families and why we are expanding the Paid Parental Leave scheme up to 26 weeks by July 2026. It is also why we are addressing the growing gender pay gap by investing $20.2 million to establish two new expert panels on pay equality. And we are making gender equality an objective of the Fair Work Act 2009 and legislating a statutory equal renumeration principle.</para>
<para>We are also investing $42.5 million to implement all the recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">R</inline><inline font-style="italic">espe</inline><inline font-style="italic">ct</inline><inline font-style="italic">@W</inline><inline font-style="italic">ork</inline> report. This includes funding women's centres in all states and territories which provide free advice and assistance to women, the implementation of 10 days paid domestic and family violence leave, and additional crisis and transitional housing options for women and children fleeing domestic and family violence and older women on low incomes who are at risk of homelessness.</para>
<para>The changes proposed by this bill are an important part of these widespread reforms, so I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank honourable members for their contribution to the debate on this Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022. This bill is a significant milestone in delivering on the government's commitment to fully implement the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report. It represents an historic shift in how public policy and the legislative framework supports people who experience sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace. I thank the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins. I thank members of the Respect@Work Council and all those who have worked and continue to work to implement the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report recommendations and drive change in Australian workplaces.</para>
<para>The government has moved decisively to implement seven of the recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report through this bill. These reforms will have an immediate impact in setting cultural norms around preventative effort and are critical for ensuring safer, respectful and more equitable workplaces in Australia. The cornerstone recommendation of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report which is implemented by this bill is the introduction of a positive duty on employers to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate certain forms of unlawful sex discrimination, including sexual harassment, as far as possible. To ensure the positive duty is effective, the bill will provide the Australian Human Rights Commission with new functions to monitor and enforce compliance with the duty, working with businesses along the way to support their compliance. This will implement recommendations 17 and 18 of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report.</para>
<para>The bill will replace the object clause, inserted by the respect at work act 2021, which stated that an object of the act is to achieve 'equality of opportunity' between men and women with 'substantive equality' between men and women. This will implement recommendation 16(a) of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report. The bill will also implement recommendations 16(b) and 16(c) by expressly prohibiting in the Sex Discrimination Act conduct that results in a hostile workplace environment on the basis of sex, and ensuring the provision relating to sex-based harassment prohibits an appropriate range of conduct by removing the reference to conduct of a 'seriously' demeaning nature.</para>
<para>The bill will provide the Australian Human Rights Commission with a broad inquiry function to inquire into systemic unlawful discrimination, implementing recommendation 19. The bill will insert a cost protection provision in the Australian Human Rights Commission Act to provide greater certainty to parties during court proceedings in relation to costs. It will also remove procedural barriers in the Australian Human Rights Commission Act by enabling representative bodies to continue representative complaints in the federal courts. These measures will implement recommendations 23 and 25. This bill will ensure that Commonwealth public sector organisations are also required to report to the Workplace Gender Equality Agency on their gender equality indicators, pursuant to recommendation 43. The bill will also make amendments arising from the changes made by the respect at work act 2021 to provide consistency across the Commonwealth antidiscrimination framework and to achieve the intended outcomes of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report. This includes clarifying that victimising conduct can form the basis of a civil action for unlawful discrimination, and ensuring that a complaint can be terminated by the President of the Australian Human Rights Commission only if it is made more than 24 months after the alleged unlawful conduct took place.</para>
<para>This bill will significantly strengthen the legal and regulatory frameworks relating to sexual harassment and increase the focus on prevention. In doing so, this bill represents a paradigm shift in how public policy and the legislative framework supports people who experience sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace. Sexual harassment is unacceptable, but it is by no means inevitable. It is preventable. This bill is a crucial step in the government's ongoing prevention efforts. There is more work to do to implement the remaining <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report recommendations, and the government is committed to this task.</para>
<para>I thank all honourable members who have moved amendments to the bill for their contributions to and engagement with the bill. The amendments moved by the opposition bear no actual resemblance to the recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report, and so the government will not be supporting them. The amendments moved by the members for Wentworth and Warringah, while I appreciate the intent behind them, go beyond the scope of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report. The government will not support them.</para>
<para>I would like to spend a short amount of time discussing the member for Kooyong's amendment. This is a very important matter, and it is not a simple matter. The issue of the cost model in the bill has been the subject of some debate recently, so I'd like to set out just why the Australian Human Rights Commission and Commissioner Jenkins have recommended the model in the bill. Let's be very clear about this—the cost model in the bill is the model recommended by the Australian Human Rights Commission and Commissioner Jenkins. That recommendation was the product of extensive consultation and careful consideration by the commission. Importantly, we are not talking about a cost provision that would apply only to matters involving allegations of sexual harassment in an employment context, which is the example that has been cited by the member for Kooyong and others.</para>
<para>The costs provision in the bill would apply to all federal discrimination matters equally. Under the costs model in the bill, the default position would be that an applicant and a respondent would have to bear their own costs only. However, the court would retain a discretion to award costs in the interest of justice, which will be decided according to a set of mandatory criteria, including the financial circumstances of the parties, the conduct of the parties, whether the proceedings involved an issue of public importance, and other matters. This is a vast improvement on the status quo. Currently when it comes to discrimination matters the default provision is that an unsuccessful party will be ordered to pay the other side's costs. And as Commissioner Jenkins told us in the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work </inline>report, this risk of an adverse costs order deters victims of sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination from pursuing claims in the federal courts. As Commissioner Jenkins recently told a Senate committee, the costs model in the government's bill—and I quote from her evidence—'addresses the deterrent factor discussed in the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report while also giving the courts significant flexibility to make costs orders in the interests of justice'. That is a really key point.</para>
<para>I've listened carefully to the member for Kooyong. I've listened carefully to the many individual advocates and organisations who have contacted me and my office and contacted other ministers in the government in support of what is often called an equal access costs model. The government takes the concerns that have been raised very seriously and will continue to consider those concerns as we finalise our response to the Senate committee's report on this bill. I would note that in her speech on the bill the member for Kooyong referred to sexual harassment and sex discrimination matters and referred to the need to change workplace cultures that permit discriminatory treatment. I understand and share her concerns and agree that we need to change workplace cultures that permit discriminatory treatment. That is fundamentally what this bill is about, particularly when it comes to the introduction of a positive duty on employers to eliminate sexual harassment and sex discrimination.</para>
<para>However, it must not be forgotten that the costs provision in this bill and the alternative model proposed by the member for Kooyong would apply equally to all discrimination matters, not just sexual harassment and sex discrimination matters and not just employment matters or matters where there exists a vast asymmetry of power and advantage. It cannot be assumed that respondents to all discrimination claims will have deep pockets. In some cases respondents may be sole traders or small-business owners. Respondents may be unincorporated associations or local sporting clubs. The costs model in the bill seeks to strike a balance when it comes to discrimination matters generally, and I accept that reasonable minds may differ on whether the bill strikes that balance appropriately.</para>
<para>Importantly, the model in the bill includes a discretion for courts to award costs in the interests of justice. In considering the interests of justice in a particular case—such as a sexual harassment matter in an employment context, where, as the member for Kooyong says, there will almost invariably exist a vast asymmetry of power and economic advantage—the bill directs a court to consider the financial circumstances of each of the parties, whether the subject matter of the proceedings involves an issue of public importance, and other relevant considerations. And that is a really key point.</para>
<para>More broadly, I would like to reiterate that this is just the start, in the earliest months of a new government, of a conversation about human rights and antidiscrimination in this country. It's a conversation that I welcome and that I want to keep having. I thank the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee for their considered inquiry into and report on the bill. I note the Senate committee's recommendation that I should refer for inquiry by the Australian Law Reform Commission the operation of the cost provisions in the bill, including a focus on public interest litigation under those provisions, six to 12 months after royal assent. I will have more to say about that soon. I also welcome the Senate committee's recommendation that the bill be passed. I again thank all honourable members of this House for their contributions to the debate and commend the bill to the House.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a second time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>31</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1), (2), (3) and (5), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 1, item 5, page 4 (line 9), after "conduct", insert "in relation to the second person".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Schedule 1, item 5, page 4 (lines 11 and 12), omit "or after".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Schedule 2, item 8, page 7 (line 7), omit "possible", substitute "reasonably practicable".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Schedule 2, item 8, page 7 (line 16), omit "possible", substitute "reasonably practicable".</para></quote>
<para>I circulated some amendments during my second reading speech and outlined the coalition's reasons for supporting those amendments. Today I wish to move the amendments in four groups, and I'll speak briefly to the first group. The principle we're adopting with all of our amendments is to make it easier for businesses to comply with and achieve the intention behind this bill. We're not seeking to see boxes ticked, we're not seeking to burden workplaces unnecessarily, but we are seeking to ensure that workplaces are safe place for all Australians. If employers can't easily fulfil the obligation this legislation places on them and an undue additional regulatory burden is imposed, we will create more problems than we solve. We must take a path that's achievable and will lead to tangible change.</para>
<para>The bill proposes to insert section 28M into the Sex Discrimination Act, which would make it unlawful for a person to subject another person to a workplace environment that's hostile on the grounds of sex. This concept already exists in the antidiscrimination law, although the provision is drafted broadly. We propose an amendment to align the provision with existing case law. The issue with the way the provision is drafted is that there isn't a requirement for the first person or the second person to actually be in the workplace at the same time, or for there to be a temporal connection between the conduct and the harm. For instance, there are businesses that operate on many different sites in different units. It's important that the complaint be related to the activity that goes on at the site or the unit in which a person works. It's also important that the conduct occurs at the relevant time that the person who's bringing the complaint worked in the business.</para>
<para>In relation to the temporal connection, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry pointed out in their submission to the committee as follows:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… from a practical perspective, there are unique circumstances in which an extended lapsed period of time could unfairly punish employers, even where they have taken action to address workplace hostility. For example, consider a scenario in which there exists a cultural problem of sexism at a workplace. If an employer takes action to rectify the situation and ensures that the workplace is no longer "offensive, intimidating or humiliating" to prospective female employees, but a female employee is employed at the workplace at a later date, hears about the prior conduct and is subsequently intimidated, it is likely that proposed section 28M is enlivened. Intimidating conduct has been engaged in and an intimidated person has been in the workplace after the conduct occurred, although the two events were not contemporaneous and there is otherwise no connection between the events and the person.</para></quote>
<para>That means that where a business previously had a bad culture of sexist behaviour and the employee fixed their culture, but an employee was not there at the time but heard about bad culture and was intimated by it, under the legislation as currently drafted they could bring an action. That does not seem to be the intent of the legislation, and it therefore should be clarified. Our amendment would amend section 28M to insert 'in relation to' and delete 'after the conduct occurs' to bring the provision into line with existing case law.</para>
<para>The bill proposes to insert section 47C into the Sex Discrimination Act to establish a positive duty on employers to take reasonable and proportionate measures to eliminate unlawful discrimination on the basis of sex, including sexual harassment, within a workplace. Again, let me draw on the submission of the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. They say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… section 47C would require employers and PCBUs to take measures to eliminate "as far as possible" certain conduct. Under work health and safety law, the obligation imposed on PCBUs is to ensure the health and safety of their workers "as far as is reasonably practicable". The widespread use of "reasonably practicable" under work health and safety law has provided PCBUs with a substantial degree of understanding about the meaning of that threshold. There is also extensive case law about the meaning of these words which offers further clarity.</para></quote>
<para>They quote in their submission the High Court case of Slivak and Lurgi and the test applied by Justice Gaudron of what 'reasonably practicable' means. They say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The new phrase "as far as possible" does not share such clarity.</para></quote>
<para>Like ACCI, we believe that 'as far as reasonably practicable' is the preferable test. Our proposed amendment to section 47C is to insert 'as far as reasonably practicable' and to delete 'as far as possible'. That will more closely align the positive duty created in this bill with the existing obligations on employers under the work health and safety model law. This is essential, as we want to achieve the objects of the bill without creating unnecessary additional burdens on businesses, particularly small businesses.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that amendments (1), (2), (3) and (5) moved by the member for Berowra be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [12:49]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>81</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, A. N.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>57</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, R. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Katter, R. C.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>Morrison, S. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Tudge, A. E.</name>
                  <name>van Manen, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Schedule 2, item 8, page 7 (lines 9 to 11), omit ", including inquiring into compliance, giving compliance notices and accepting undertakings".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Schedule 2, item 8, page 7 (line 16), omit "possible", substitute "reasonably practicable".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) Schedule 2, items 17 to 25, page 11 (line 7) to page 18 (line 4), omit the items.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) Schedule 2, Part 2, page 18 (after line 30), at the end of the Part, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Sex Discrimination Act 1984</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">31 Subsection 4 (1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">compliance notice</inline> means a notice mentioned in subsection 49E(1).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">positive duty in relation to sex discrimination</inline> means section 47C.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">Regulatory Powers Act</inline> means the <inline font-style="italic">Regulatory Powers (Standard Provisions) Act 2014</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">32 After Part III</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part IIIA — Functions of Fair Work Ombudsman relating to positive duty in relation to sex discrimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49 Functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman relating to positive duty in relation to sex discrimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The following functions are conferred on the Fair Work Ombudsman:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) to inquire into a person's compliance with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) to ensure compliance with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: The positive duty in relation to sex discrimination is section 47C.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman do not include inquiring into an intelligence agency's compliance with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) If the Fair Work Ombudsman reasonably suspects that an intelligence agency is not complying with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination, the Fair Work Ombudsman must refer the matter to the Inspector General of Intelligence and Security.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) A reference in subsection (3) to an intelligence agency is a reference to the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Australian Secret Intelligence Service;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Office of National Intelligence;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the Australian Signals Directorate;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) that part of the Defence Department known as the Australian Geospatial-Intelligence Organisation (including any part of the Defence Force that performs functions on behalf of that part of the Department);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) that part of the Defence Department known as the Defence Intelligence Organisation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49A Performance of inquiry function relating to positive duty in relation to sex discrimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Fair Work Ombudsman may inquire into a person's compliance with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination if the Fair Work Ombudsman reasonably suspects that the person is not complying.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The Fair Work Ombudsman must act fairly in the performance of the function referred to in paragraph 49(1)(a).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Subsection (2) does not impose a duty on the Fair Work Ombudsman that is enforceable in court.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) Subsection (3) does not affect a legally enforceable obligation to observe the rules of natural justice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49B Fair Work Ombudsman to notify person and give opportunity for making of submissions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) As soon as practicable after commencing an inquiry into a person's compliance with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination, the Fair Work Ombudsman must give the person a written notice stating the grounds on which the Fair Work Ombudsman commenced the inquiry.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The Fair Work Ombudsman must not find that a person is not complying with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination unless it has given a reasonable opportunity to the person, to do, at the option of the person, either or both of the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) to appear before the Fair Work Ombudsman, whether in person or by a representative, and make oral submissions in relation to the person's compliance;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) to make written submissions to the Fair Work Ombudsman in relation to the person's compliance.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49C Application of certain provisions of Fair Work Act</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Sections 708 to 714A and 718 to 718A of the <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Act 2009</inline> apply in relation to the functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman set out in section 49 of this Act, and in relation to the performance of those functions, as if an inquiry under this Part were an investigation into a suspected contravention of the<inline font-style="italic"> Fair Work Act 2009</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49D Notification of findings and recommendations</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">If, as a result of an inquiry into a person's compliance with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination, the Fair Work Ombudsman finds that the person is not complying, the Fair Work Ombudsman:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) must notify the person in writing of its finding and the reasons for the finding; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) may notify the person of any recommendations by the Fair Work Ombudsman for preventing a repetition or continuation of the failure to comply.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49E Giving of compliance notice</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) If, as a result of an inquiry into a person's compliance with the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination, the Fair Work Ombudsman finds that the person is not complying, the Fair Work Ombudsman may give the person a written notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The notice must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) set out the name of the person to whom the notice is given; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) set out brief details of the failure to comply; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) specify action that the person must take, or refrain from taking, in order to address the failure; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) specify a reasonable period (starting at least 21 days after the day the notice is given) within which the person must take, or refrain from taking, the specified action; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) if the Fair Work Ombudsman considers it appropriate—specify a reasonable period within which the person must provide the Fair Work Ombudsman with evidence that the person has taken, or refrained from taking, the specified action; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) set out any other matters prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this paragraph.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) However, if the Fair Work Ombudsman has accepted an undertaking from a person under Part 6 of the Regulatory Powers Act in relation to the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination, a notice must not be given to the person under subsection (1) unless the undertaking is withdrawn, cancelled or expired.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49F Reconsideration of compliance notice</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Ombudsman must </inline> <inline font-style="italic">reconsider compliance notice if requested</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) A person to whom a compliance notice is given may request the Fair Work Ombudsman to reconsider the compliance notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The request must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) be made in writing; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) set out the reasons for the request; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) be given to the Fair Work Ombudsman within 21 days after the day the compliance notice is given to the person.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) If requested, the Fair Work Ombudsman must reconsider the compliance notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Ombudsman may reconsider compliance notice on </inline> <inline font-style="italic">own initiative</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The Fair Work Ombudsman may reconsider a compliance notice given to a person without receiving a request if satisfied there is sufficient reason to do so.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Reconsideration</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) The Fair Work Ombudsman must act expeditiously in reconsidering a compliance notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) After reconsidering a compliance notice, the Fair Work Ombudsman must:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) affirm the compliance notice; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) vary the compliance notice; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) revoke the compliance notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) The Fair Work Ombudsman must give written notice of a decision under subsection (6) to the person to whom the compliance notice was given, setting out the reasons for the decision.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Decisions by delegates</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) If the Fair Work Ombudsman's functions under this section are performed by a delegate, the delegate who reconsiders a compliance notice:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) must not have been involved in giving the compliance notice; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) must hold a position, or perform duties, of at least the same level as the person who gave the compliance notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49G Review of complian ce notice</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) A person who has been given a compliance notice may apply to the Federal Court or the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) for a review of the notice on either or both of the following grounds:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the person has not failed to comply as set out in the notice;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the notice does not comply with subsection 49E(2) or (3).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) At any time after the application has been made, the court concerned may stay the operation of the notice on the terms and conditions that the court considers appropriate.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The court concerned may confirm, vary or cancel the notice after reviewing it.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49H Enforcement of compliance notice</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Fair Work Ombudsman may apply to the Federal Court or the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) for an order under subsection (2) if:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) a person has been given a compliance notice; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the notice has not been revoked or cancelled; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the notice is not being reconsidered under section 49F or reviewed under section 49G; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the Fair Work Ombudsman considers that the person has not complied with the notice.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) If the court concerned is satisfied that the person has not complied with the notice, the court may make any or all of the following orders:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) an order directing the person to comply with the notice;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any other order that the court considers appropriate.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49J Enforceable undertakings</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Enforceable provision</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Section 47C of this Act is enforceable under Part 6 of the Regulatory Powers Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note 1: Part 6 of the Regulatory Powers Act creates a framework for accepting and enforcing undertakings relating to compliance with provisions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note 2: Section 47C of this Act is the positive duty in relation to sex discrimination.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Authorised persons</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) For the purposes of Part 6 of the Regulatory Powers Act, the Fair Work Ombudsman is an authorised person in relation to section 47C of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Relevant court</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) For the purposes of Part 6 of the Regulatory Powers Act, each of the following courts is a relevant court in relation to section 47C of this Act:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Federal Court;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Enforceable undertaking may be published on the Fair Work Ombudsman's website</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) The Fair Work Ombudsman may publish on the Ombudsman's website an undertaking given in relation to section 47C of this Act.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Extension to external Territories</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) Part 6 of the Regulatory Powers Act, as that Part applies in relation to section 47C of this Act, extends to every external Territory.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49K Delegation by the Fair Work Ombudsman</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Fair Work Ombudsman may, in writing, delegate all or any of the Fair Work Ombudsman's functions or powers under this Part (including the Fair Work Ombudsman's powers and functions under Part 6 of the Regulatory Powers Act in relation to section 47C of this Act) to a member of the staff of the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman who is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) an SES employee; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) an acting SES employee; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) classified as Executive Level 2 or equivalent; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) acting in a position usually occupied by a member of the staff of the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman who is so classified.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: The expressions <inline font-style="italic">SES employee</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">acting SES employee</inline> are defined in the <inline font-style="italic">Acts Interpretation Act 1901</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) In performing functions or exercising powers under a delegation, the delegate must comply with any directions of the Fair Work Ombudsman.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">49L Jurisdiction of Federal Court and Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Federal Court and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Division 2) have concurrent jurisdiction with respect to civil matters arising under this Part.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) Schedule 3, page 19 (line 1) to page 21 (line 22), omit the Schedule, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Schedule 3 — Inquiries into systemic unlawful dis crimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> <inline font-style="italic">Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986</inline></para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">1 Subsection 3(1)</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">systemic unlawful discrimination</inline>: see subsection 46PYA(4).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">2 After Part IIC</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Insert:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Part IID — Systemic discrimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">46PYA Functions of Fair Work Ombudsman relating to system ic discrimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The following functions are conferred on the Fair Work Ombudsman:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) to inquire into any matter that may relate to systemic unlawful discrimination or suspected systemic unlawful discrimination;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) to do anything incidental or conducive to the performance of any of the preceding functions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman do not include inquiring into a matter that may relate to systemic unlawful discrimination or suspected systemic unlawful discrimination of an intelligence agency.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) A reference in subsection (2) to an intelligence agency is a reference to the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Australian Secret Intelligence Service;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Office of National Intelligence;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) the Australian Signals Directorate;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) that part of the Defence Department known as the Australian Geospatial-Intelligence Organisation (including any part of the Defence Force that performs functions on behalf of that part of the Department);</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) that part of the Defence Department known as the Defence Intelligence Organisation.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) In this Act:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"><inline font-style="italic">systemic unlawful discrimination</inline> means unlawful discrimination that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) affects a class or group of persons; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) is continuous, repetitive or forms a pattern.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">46PYB Performance of functions relating to systemic discrimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Fair Work Ombudsman may perform the functions referred to in paragraph 46PYA(1)(a) when:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Fair Work Ombudsman is requested to do so by the Minister; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) it appears to the Fair Work Ombudsman to be desirable to do so.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">46PYC Application of certain provisions of the Fair Work Act</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Sections 708 to 714A and 718 to 718A of the <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Act 2009</inline> apply in relation to the functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman set out in section 46PYA of this Act, and in relation to the performance of those functions, as if an inquiry under this Part were an investigation into a suspected contravention of the<inline font-style="italic"> Fair Work Act 2009</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">46PYD Fair Work Ombudsman to give opportunity for making of submissions</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In an inquiry into a matter under this Part, the Fair Work Ombudsman must not make an adverse finding about a person unless it has given a reasonable opportunity to the person, to do, at the option of the person, either or both of the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) to appear before the Fair Work Ombudsman, whether in person or by a representative, and make oral submissions in relation to the matter;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) to make written submissions to the Fair Work Ombudsman in relation to the matter.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">46PYE Reports</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) If the Fair Work Ombudsman has undertaken an inquiry into a matter under this Part, the Fair Work Ombudsman may do either or both of the following:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) report to the Minister in relation to the inquiry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) publish a report in relation to the inquiry.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The Fair Work Ombudsman may include in its report any recommendations by the Fair Work Ombudsman for addressing the matter.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">46PYF Reports to be tabled in Parliament</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The Minister must cause a copy of every report furnished to the Minister by the Fair Work Ombudsman under section 46PYE(1) to be laid before each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the report is received by the Minister.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">46PYG Delegation by the Fair Work Ombudsman</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) The Fair Work Ombudsman may, in writing, delegate all or any of the Fair Work Ombudsman's functions or powers under this Part to a member of the staff of the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman who is:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) an SES employee; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) an acting SES employee; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) classified as Executive Level 2 or equivalent; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) acting in a position usually occupied by a member of the staff of the Office of the Fair Work Ombudsman who is so classified.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Note: The expressions <inline font-style="italic">SES employee</inline> and <inline font-style="italic">acting SES employee</inline> are defined in the <inline font-style="italic">Ac</inline><inline font-style="italic">ts Interpretation Act 1901</inline>.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) In performing functions or exercising powers under a delegation, the delegate must comply with any directions of the Fair Work Ombudsman.</para></quote>
<para>These amendments deal with the transfer of the functions in relation to enforcement and inquiries that have been given to the Human Rights Commission under this bill to the Fair Work Ombudsman. Our area of concern regarding this bill is that it seeks to expand significantly the role of the Human Rights Commission. Let me be very clear: we have very great respect for Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins and the great work she has done this space. Our concern, again, is about the duplication of processes and that workplaces could find themselves being subjected to multiple inquiries through multiple bodies simultaneously. With the Human Rights Commission having enforcement functions in relation to the positive duty, the same matters could be brought to the work health and safety regulator and the Human Rights Commission at the same time.</para>
<para>We're also concerned that the Human Rights Commission's conciliation role would be compromised if it is required to conduct enforcement action in relation to the positive duty, as well as to provide conciliation for the employee bringing forth the complaint. Serving both functions in relation to the same complaint would not be good practice. In order to avoid duplication of the enforcement powers in relation to the positive duty, and in order to protect the conciliation role of the commission and to prevent the duplication of inquiry powers, which could see businesses or sectors subject to inquiry by multiple government agencies at the same time, our amendment says that the Fair Work Ombudsman should hold enforcement powers in relation to the positive duty and the powers of inquiry in relation to systemic unlawful discrimination.</para>
<para>Let me explain why this is consistent with the roles that the Fair Work Ombudsman already has. There are powers and functions allowing the existing powers and functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman. The functions of the Fair Work Ombudsman are provided for in section 68(2) of the Fair Work Act and include monitoring and compliance with the Fair Work Act and Fair Work instruments; investigating conduct contrary to the Fair Work Act and Fair Work instruments; and any other functions conferred on the ombudsman by any other legislation. The Fair Work Ombudsman can undertake workplace investigations in relation to adverse action and it can conduct investigations. Where an investigation finds that the employer has or has had discriminatory practices that are linked to adverse actions for employees or prospective employees, it can take appropriate enforcement actions. Enforcement actions can include issuing compliance notices, enforceable undertakings or commencing proceedings in court before the Fair Work Commission. This extends to instituting proceedings for breach of civil remedy provisions, including those that prohibit adverse action, coercion or undue influence in relation to workplace rights; adverse action or coercion in relation to industrial activities; and those which prohibit contraventions of the National Employment Standards, a modern award enterprise agreement or national minimum wage orders.</para>
<para>In relation to adverse action, this includes workplace discrimination on the basis of various protected attributes, including sex, sexual orientation or marital status. The Fair Work Ombudsman notes that bullying and harassment, including sexual harassment, can in some circumstances amount to unlawful discrimination and then falls within its powers. So we can see the link between the role that the Fair Work Ombudsman already provides and the sense of having these matters dealt with by the Fair Work Ombudsman.</para>
<para>On the Fair Work Ombudsman's broader powers in relation to industries: it can conduct inquiries to monitor compliance within an industry regional supply chain, even where there's no specific allegation of noncompliance with workplace laws, in response to trends in data that indicate systemic noncompliance in particular businesses or industries as is posited in this legislation.</para>
<para>In conclusion, these amendments seek to replicate exactly the same powers that this bill gives to the Australian Human Rights Commission in relation to enforcement and systemic inquiries, and gives those powers to the experienced Fair Work Ombudsman.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government opposes these amendments, which are shifty amendments in exactly the same spirit that those opposite brought forward not a full implementation of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline>report but rather a partial implementation of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work </inline>report, and then had the gall to oppose amendments that we moved to the government's bill last year that would have implemented the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work </inline>report in full.</para>
<para>We are implementing the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work </inline>report in full, and these amendments, like the previous set of amendments, and like the next lot of amendments that the shadow Attorney-General is bringing forward, are designed to undermine and oppose the intent of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work </inline>report.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that opposition amendments (4), (6), (7) and (8) be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [13:03]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>86</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, A. N.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>53</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, R. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>Morrison, S. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Tudge, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp> (Berowra) (13:05):</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (9) and (10), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(9) Schedule 4, page 22 (line 1) to page 25 (line 12), omit the Schedule.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) Schedule 5, page 26 (line 1) to page 28 (line 28), omit the Schedule.</para></quote>
<para>These amendments deal with representative actions and costs orders. Schedule 4 of the bill seeks to amend the Human Rights Commission Act to make it easier for unions and other representative groups to bring representative claims in the Federal Court. The amendments would allow bodies to commence legal proceedings on behalf of other parties rather than the aggrieved person taking the matter for themselves. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has explained why this provision is not necessary. The ACCI has argued that representative groups are not prohibited from providing financial or legal support to parties pursuing a representative proceeding in the courts. Rather, they're simply prevented from commencing the proceedings on their behalf. It's not clear how allowing trade unions to commence legal proceedings on behalf of aggrieved persons would lead to better outcomes for these persons, especially in light of support that representative groups can already provide.</para>
<para>Fundamentally, litigants in representative actions need to be aggrieved persons, not bodies that represent or merely purport to represent their interest. This is how the existing avenue for class actions rightly operates. The interests of representative bodies do not always align with those they represent. Allowing these bodies to commence and run representative actions on their behalf could lead to the aggrieved person's interests being neglected in favour of other motives, such as a desire for a more lucrative settlement or political objectives. Further, representative bodies are not those whose reputations, finances and relationships are vulnerable during litigation. Allowing representative bodies to be the party instructing lawyers on the running of legal proceedings risks the pursuit of interests that are unrelated to those of the affected individuals.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Berowra will just pause for a moment. There is far too much noise in the chamber. Out of respect for the member for Berowra I would ask members to remain silent or to leave the chamber while the debate continues.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Mr Speaker. On representative proceedings, it should be said that there are sufficient mechanisms to enable representative proceedings in the Federal Court under part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act. Further, loosening these rules in favour of unions who can pursue their own agendas rather than those of the complainant is not warranted. Our amendments propose to delete schedule 4 and leave the law as it stands in relation to representative actions.</para>
<para>In relation to costs, in schedule 5 the bill inserts a cost-neutral arrangement into the Human Rights Commission Act. This means that parties are expected to bear their own costs, with courts having power to make an alternative determination, considering the factors in the legislation, including: the financial circumstances of each party to the proceedings; the conduct of the parties, including conduct dealing with the commission; whether any parties have been wholly unsuccessful; whether any party has made an offer in writing to settle; whether the subject matter of the proceedings involves an issue of public importance; or any other matter the court considers relevant. We think discretion as to costs best sits with the court, and our amendments will remove schedule 5 of the bill and leave costs determinations at the discretion of the court, with the principle being that costs follow the event.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government opposes these amendments. They again show the Liberal Party's hostility to the interests of workers—hostility to the interests of ordinary working people in our country—and they show the Liberal Party's hostility to access to justice. What a disgrace.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that amendments (9) and (10) be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [13:13] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>84</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>54</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, R. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>Morrison, S. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Tudge, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendment (11) as circulated in my name:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(11)   Schedule 8, item 2, page 44 (lines 9 and 10), omit the item.</para></quote>
<para>Amendment 11 seeks to retain the principle of equality of opportunity, which is a fundamental principle for those of us on this side of the House, in the objects act. We believe equality of opportunity should be retained, because equality of opportunity offers a state of fairness in which individuals are treated equally, and it's a fundamental principle of the Sex Discrimination Act. The circumstances of an individual's birth should not determine their future status. It's the application of effort and competition that's key. Equal opportunity implies that people should be judged on their merits and not discriminated against on the basis of sex in employment or access to public services. Equality of opportunity is the principle that people should be given the same opportunity to exercise their talents and abilities but that it's up to the individual to apply themselves to that opportunity as to what they will ultimately achieve. And we think this principle should remain in the act.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:16</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government opposes this amendment, which, yet again, like all the other Liberal amendments, is directly contrary to the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@W</inline><inline font-style="italic">ork</inline> report and—just to be clear—just like the bill that the Liberal Party brought to the parliament last year was contrary to the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report. They are at it again and they are seeking to move away from very clear recommendations in the report.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that amendment (11) be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [13:21]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>87</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>52</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, R. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>Morrison, S. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Tudge, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>By leave—I move amendments (1) to (8), as circulated in my name, together.</para>
<para>Nobody should be subjected to conduct at work which is offensive, which is intimidating or which is humiliating. When antidiscrimination law is at its most effective no protected characteristic is more important than any other. You should not be subject to a hostile work environment because of your sex. There is wide agreement on that from our entire community, but that is not enough. You should not be subject to a hostile work environment because of your sexuality.</para>
<para>I celebrate the respect at work bill and I commend the government for putting forward this legislation at this time. However, in the noble pursuit of swiftly implementing the remaining findings of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report, this bill is too narrowly focused on sex. Hostile environment provisions and the positive duty to prevent discrimination do not extend to the full range of characteristics protected under the Sex Discrimination Act, including sexual orientation, gender identity, intersex status, pregnancy or relationship status. In particular, this bill does not provide appropriate protection to LGBTQ people. That is absolutely crucial in our consideration because there's ample evidence that LGBTQ people are particularly vulnerable to hostile environments in the workplace and are particularly vulnerable to the mental health impacts of such environments.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Can members please sit quietly or leave the chamber so the member for Wentworth can be heard in silence.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you. The bill also creates inconsistency in terms of what we're asking from business, who must already comply with antidiscrimination law that relates to all the protected characteristics under the Sex Discrimination Act.</para>
<para>The amendment I have moved extends the hostile workplace environment and positive duty provisions in this bill to cover all characteristics that are protected under the Sex Discrimination Act. It provides protections for the LGBTQ community and greater consistency and ease of implementation for business. I commend the amendment to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>These amendments that are moved by the member for Wentworth propose to extend the hostile workplace environment, sex based harassment and positive duty provisions to all of the protected attributes under the Sex Discrimination Act. While I can understand the sentiment that lies behind the amendments that the member for Wentworth has moved, it is the government's position that this is not the time—that is, the context of this bill—for these particular expansions of a whole range of provisions in the Sex Discrimination Act.</para>
<para>The government's focus in bringing this bill to the parliament was to ensure alignment with the recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report. That report—sadly, ignored for more than a year by the former government—was delivered by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner following a very broad national inquiry, one of the largest inquiries ever conducted by any commissioner at the Australian Human Rights Commission. It was a broad national inquiry that many hundreds of Australians made detailed submissions to, with many public sessions conducted by Kate Jenkins, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, and it produced, as we all now know—I think the former government would have preferred that we knew nothing about the excellent <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report, because they sat on it for more than a year. But, as we now know, here's this major inquiry. The former government's response to it was to say that they were going to implement all of its recommendations, and when it came to it, in August 2021, and the government did bring a bill to the parliament we saw that they had no intention of implementing all of the recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report.</para>
<para>What our government has done, having made the clearest of clear commitments at the election, was to consult with a very broad range of stakeholders on the provisions that the House can see are now in the bill that is before the House. These provisions build on the extensive consultation that underpin the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report. As I have said in my second reading speech and in my summing-up speech, this bill implements the remaining recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report, which is what this House should be engaged in.</para>
<para>Expanding the bill, as the member for Wentworth's amendment would do, beyond what was recommended in the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report would require further consultation with all of the stakeholders that the government has consulted with in relation to the provisions of the bill. It's our view that this is the appropriate time for honouring the commitment that we took to the election, which was to pick up the remaining recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report and bring them to the parliament. That's what this bill does. Significant time has passed since the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report was released by the former government in March 2020. The former government of course had had the report for some months before then. The further consultation that would be required to go through the quite complex, albeit very well-intentioned, amendments that the member for Wentworth brings to the parliament would delay the passage of this bill.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>43</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lyne Electorate</title>
          <page.no>43</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Dungog's iconic Tinshed Brewery has just celebrated six years of brewing beers and serving the local community. The brewery has faced a lot of challenges in those times, but it has grown to a staff of 10. I congratulate Jimmy and Haley Cox for the great results they get and the wonderful brew they make.</para>
<para>Despite a number of setbacks, Dungog's annual Pedalfest pushed on, taking the road recently for a fun weekend organised by John Walton and Dungog Rotary. They raised $5,500 for local projects. Congratulations, John and Dungog Rotary.</para>
<para>I'd also like to mention father-and-daughter team Richard and Emma Sewell of Taree, who completed the World 70.3 Half Ironman Triathlon Championship race held in Utah. Emma is the 18 to 24 years Australian champion and Richard competed in the 50 to 54 years division. Both Sewells are members of the Forster Tri Club. I congratulate both of them.</para>
<para>After securing a full-time golfing scholarship, 18-year-old Quedesha Golledge, Cundletown's latest golfing talent, heads to the US in January to start a three-year stay at Tarleton State University in Texas. Quedesha is an outstanding golfer and is well-known in the Mid North Coast region. Good luck, Quedesha. I'm sure our community will be very proud of what you achieve.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bangladesh</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>This year marks the 50th anniversary of bilateral relations between Australia and Bangladesh. Australia was one of the first countries to recognise Bangladesh after Bangladesh became an independent country in 1971 and Gough Whitlam was the first Western leader and the only Australian Prime Minister to visit Bangladesh since its independence. Last Friday night in Adelaide the Bangladesh Jubo League held a community event marking the 50-year milestone.</para>
<para>In 1972 Bangladesh was a poverty-stricken country in turmoil after its liberation war and was relying heavily on international aid. Today it is a middle-ranking economic and military nation, with a population of around 168 million people.</para>
<para>Two-way annual trade between Australia and Bangladesh remains relatively low at around $2.6 billion per annum. With around 50,000 people from Bangladesh now living in Australia, as we mark the golden jubilee of diplomatic relations between the two countries, we should seize the considerable opportunities and do much more to bolster trade between Australia and Bangladesh. For both countries there is much to be gained and considerable goodwill that should not be lost or wasted.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Moore Electorate: Roads</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOODENOUGH</name>
    <name.id>74046</name.id>
    <electorate>Moore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>According to a recent RAC survey, motorists nominated the busy intersection of Marmion Avenue and Seacrest Drive in Sorrento as Perth's most dangerous junction. Statistics reveal that there have been 31 vehicle collisions at this intersection. Several local residents have contacted me to raise safety concerns on behalf of the community, particularly the difficulty of turning right at the intersection onto Marmion Avenue when heading southbound after completing school drop-offs at the nearby Sacred Heart College.</para>
<para>Whilst the federal government has delivered over $100,000 for road improvements along Seacrest Drive, no funding has been allocated in the recent budget for road safety upgrades at this hazardous intersection. I call upon the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government to provide, as a matter of urgency, the necessary road safety funding required to install a roundabout or a set of traffic lights at this local traffic blackspot.</para>
<para>On a related matter, I'm pleased to inform the House that, after many years of lobbying, I can thank the City of Joondalup council for finally approving the installation of a roundabout at the busy intersection of Walter Padbury Boulevard and Hepburn Avenue in Padbury.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Epilepsy</title>
          <page.no>44</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I stand here to highlight a petition on behalf of community members who have requested financial assistance for those suffering with epilepsy. Those who are not able to receive disability support are now having to pay for all their own medication, doctors' appointments, dietary needs, transportation, and seizure warning systems, all of which are required to keep seizures under control. In addition, the side effects of medication, both physically and emotionally, can have a great impact on their everyday lives and, I'm advised, can also make working in an employed capacity very difficult.</para>
<para>The petition as presented highlights the importance of much-needed financial assistance in order to effectively help those living with epilepsy—helping people to maintain a healthy lifestyle, as many within our communities live with the condition throughout their whole life. Times are tough right now, and seizure control is the key to keeping people healthy. However, unfortunately, many people cannot afford the recommended ketogenic diet which has proven to be helpful for epilepsy and seizure control.</para>
<para>Petitioners have requested that the government provide financial assistance to those with epilepsy who experience cost-of-living pressure that is much higher than for others. I know many within my local community do suffer from epilepsy, and I understand and present their request for this financial assistance, given the impact and pressure on their daily lives.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Indi Electorate: Arts and Culture</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The arts and culture scene in Indi is back in force, from small rural art shows to theatre and craft markets. From small gatherings to major events, it's all happening. The Wangaratta Festival of Jazz and Blues has had a triumphant return. I had the honour of being part of the 2022 national young jazz guitarist award won by Peter Koopman from Sydney—a fantastic performer. Congratulations to all the organisers, the Rural City of Wangaratta and the many amazing volunteers who made this iconic event happen once again.</para>
<para>The HotHouse Theatre company in Wodonga is enjoying full houses as patrons enjoy an impressive schedule of local and national plays. On the border, our internationally renowned Flying Fruit Fly Circus is in fine form. It's got its troupe rolling and tumbling, ready to present the Borderville Circus Festival—a fortnight of extravagance and wonder leading up to Christmas.</para>
<para>It's a heady time in Indi, and I'm so proud of the thriving and exciting arts scene that we have there. There truly is something for everyone. I extend a warm invitation to anyone in this House and particularly to both our Minister for the Arts and our Special Envoy for the Arts to pencil in a visit to Indi. Enjoy our artisans and our artistes. There are so many of them, and there's so much on offer.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Gilmore Electorate: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am delighted to be delivering for our community as part of the Albanese government's budget with a range of critical projects across my electorate of Gilmore on the New South Wales South Coast. I wish to draw attention to just three of these projects today.</para>
<para>Working with our community, I have now delivered $32 million to start the preplanning works for the Nowra bypass and finally get this crucial project started. There is $5 million for the Eurobodalla regional integrated emergency operations precinct in Moruya and $8 million for a radiation therapy centre in Moruya so that local cancer patients can get the care and treatment they need close to home.</para>
<para>This is simply a small snippet of the many commitments I have made, but each of these projects requires action and support from the New South Wales government so they can get off the ground. Today, I call on the New South Wales Liberal government to release the $8 million it promised for the Nowra bypass to get this project started now; to get behind the community's call for the radiation therapy centre in Moruya urgently; and to match New South Wales Labor's commitment of an additional $5 million for the Eurobodalla EOC to bring the total project to $25 million. I will continue working hard every single day to deliver the infrastructure our community deserves.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Climate Change</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today, COP27 begins and it will focus on the impacts of climate change. Currently, global pledges to reduce emissions will not keep global warming to 1.5 degrees. We must do more. We know the devastating floods in Pakistan this year, which caused over 1,700 people to lose their lives and $40 billion in economic losses, are just one example of the scale of the tragedy that awaits us if we do not take more serious action.</para>
<para>It's welcome that a loss and damage fund for developing countries suffering the impacts of the climate crisis is high on the agenda. The COP 27 president has said that this reflects that sense of solidarity for the victims of climate disasters, but we must do more. For the Asia-Pacific, it's an existential crisis—islands are literally disappearing!—and Australia must engage productively and pull our weight as our scope 3 emissions are major contributors to this impact. We could not possibly host a future COP event until we show we're committed to action. And yet, we have the Prime Minister not willing to attend the COP27 and represent Australia on that stage. It is so important that Australia show that we are committed to stronger action and we actually have the Prime Minister attending with world leaders. To reduce our emissions is absolutely imperative. We have committed to the Paris Agreement. We must do more.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>45</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese government has delivered its first budget, and I'm delighted that this budget has delivered significant wins for my local community of Fraser. It has announced $1.5 million for Fronditha Care in St Albans, which will create a centre for healthy ageing. A number of aged-care providers in my electorate were placed under great pressure during COVID. This government's investment in this sector is much needed.</para>
<para>We are delivering on our commitment of $100,000 for upgrades at the Quang Minh Buddhist temple in Braybrook, one of most significant Buddhist communities in the whole of Melbourne's west. We are funding a community battery in Brimbank, which will allow Fraser residents to take advantage of storage options for renewable energy.</para>
<para>We are delivering on our huge commitment to fund the construction of the Vietnamese Museum Australia. This museum will be located in Footscray and will be Australia's first museum dedicated to preserving and celebrating the incredible story of over 100,000 refugees who settled in Australia and have contributed so much since that time. I welcome the recent announcement from the Andrews Labor government to add a further $2.3 million to the construction of the museum. I would like to acknowledge the tireless advocacy for this project from my state colleagues Katie Hall, Natalie Suleyman and Sarah Connelly. This will be the largest single cultural project for the Vietnamese diaspora anywhere in the world. The Albanese government's first budget has delivered key projects for the Fraser electorate.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Facilities</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I call on the Albanese government to commit to building the large vessel dry dock in Henderson, Western Australia—a vital piece of infrastructure that will service the Navy and coalition ships over the coming decade and beyond.</para>
<para>It's now a bipartisan view that Australia's strategic circumstances are growing more dangerous. The Indo-Pacific is now a contested region. Therefore, we welcome the Prime Minister's comments in the <inline font-style="italic">Weekend Australian</inline>, where he committed to spending whatever was necessary to build our defence capability:</para>
<quote><para class="block">"We will do what is necessary to achieve it"—</para></quote>
<para>the Prime Minister said.</para>
<quote><para class="block">"This is not optional, it's necessary."</para></quote>
<para>So, will the Prime Minister and his government commit to building the dry dock in Western Australia? In March this year, the then coalition government announced a $4.3 billion investment set to create over 2,000 local jobs, sending a signal to the west that WA will be a shipbuilding powerhouse. We only have one dry dock in Sydney, built during the Second World War, but it needs an upgrade and also a partner dock on the west coast.</para>
<para>Last month, Defence confirmed to the <inline font-style="italic">West Australian</inline> newspaper the dry dock would go ahead; however, they wouldn't say whether the Albanese government would commit to the full investment. What's more concerning is that there was not a single mention of the dry dock in Labor's first budget. So again: will the Albanese government commit to building the large vessel dry dock in WA? The clock is ticking, defence industry is waiting and we need clarity on this vital piece of infrastructure.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Albanese Government</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese Labor government is getting on with tackling the rising cost of living facing so many Australian families across Hawke—across Sunbury, across Melton, across Bacchus Marsh, across my town of Ballan and everywhere around.</para>
<para>In the recent federal budget we delivered on our commitment to provide cheaper child care to Australian families. Almost 7,000 families in the electorate of Hawke are set to benefit from this change as the maximum childcare subsidy is lifted to 90 per cent along with an expansion of the Commonwealth Paid Parental Leave scheme to six months. The Albanese Labor government is easing pressure on Australian families by making it easier to look after our kids, making sure they're getting the education they need and keeping our household budgets under control.</para>
<para>The cost of medicines at our local pharmacies across Hawke will also be slashed, as the cost of scripts is reduced by $12.50 from the start of next year.</para>
<para>The Labor government is also ensuring that more Australians can afford to buy their own home with a new housing accord for all levels of government, investors and construction to deliver up to 20,000 new, affordable homes.</para>
<para>Of course, the final piece of the puzzle in easing cost-of-living pressures for all households is to get wages moving. We've introduced the bill. We're making it easier for the Fair Work Commission to order pay increases for those in the community who need it most.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>National Security</title>
          <page.no>46</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAWKE</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
    <electorate>Mitchell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to add my voice to the chorus of opposition that has been heard from around Australia for the government's decision to hastily return ISIS brides and their families here to Australia without proper consultation or planning, or consideration of national security considerations. This isn't a view confined to the opposition. Labor state members in Sydney have expressed their concern. Communities that have migrated here from the Middle East over many decades have expressed their concern at the notion that people who voluntarily left Australia to join the evil that is ISIS would be returned and put back in our community without the proper security considerations. It doesn't really matter who you are—whether you're Chaldean, Syriac, Assyrian, Melchite, Armenian, Yazidis, Turkmens, Shiite, Shabak, Sabeans, Karki, Sunnis who didn't agree—ISIS hated everybody equally. It was a violation against human rights, individual rights and humanity.</para>
<para>Any Westerner who left the safety and peace of a Western country to go and support ISIS, whether they be a woman or a man, is guilty of a crime against humanity. The government has not explained what charges will be laid against people who voluntarily left to go and support such an evil. The people who died, the communities who suffered, the people here in Sydney and Melbourne, need answers from the government about these questions. The government has said nothing. This is national security. It is of deep concern to Australians and the government must answer.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Higgins Electorate: Lloyd Street Primary School</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ANANDA-RAJAH</name>
    <name.id>290544</name.id>
    <electorate>Higgins</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I had the pleasure of touring Lloyd Street Primary School in Malvern recently. The school will be celebrating its centenary next year and is a mix of traditional red brick buildings and newer structures around a playground with pear blossoms in full bloom. I had the privilege of meeting some of their students: Charlie, Ellie, Raff, Ivy and Annabel, who, under the supervision of John Painter, took me on a tour. The children were articulate, thoughtful and personable. Principal John was happily sidelined as they took over. We came across clusters of children on the oval all deep in thought learning about life insurance, health insurance and income protection, which is part of their financial literacy program. I wish I had been offered this in my early years. It would've saved me a lot of heartache and a lot of dollars later in life!</para>
<para>Before I knew it, I was in the world of philosophy, as part of their International Baccalaureate program. The children said philosophy had taught them to keep an open mind. Watching over us were the sages of humanity lining the walls: Marie Curie, Mother Teresa, Cathy Freeman, Gandhi, Barack Obama, Rosa Parks—they knew her story—and, of course, Oprah. Outside was a beautiful painting made with the handprints of the preps titled, 'Be brave. Make Change,' in reference to National Reconciliation Week. The school is a marvel. It is a crucible of thought and of learning and of love. It should be commended for its wonderful far-reaching program.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Page Electorate: Baseball</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HOGAN</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I would like to acknowledge the wonderful achievement of the under 16 far north coast baseball squad, the far north coast Timberjacks. They won the New South Wales country baseball championships recently. It has been a remarkable effort given what the team has been through this year. Their main training venue, the Albert Park baseball complex in Lismore, was completely wiped out and unusable following the disaster we experienced earlier in the year so preparation wasn't ideal. They only played four practice matches between March and October, while the other competing squads in the championship had played a full season. They could only train in cricket nets, on tennis courts and on touch football fields.</para>
<para>When the time came to play in the championships they were just excited to be there. They started well. They won all their games but they got beaten—Deputy Speaker, given you're the member for Newcastle—by Newcastle in the rounds. However, with the percentage and where they finished they faced Newcastle again in the final. They started the final in a great way. They scored 10 home runs in the first innings. They pitched consistently. They completely outplayed Newcastle, going on to win the final 17-nil—sorry, Deputy Speaker, but you got wiped out in that game!</para>
<para>The odds were built on determination and a 'never say die' character, after some of the biggest challenges faced due to the biggest natural disaster in Australia's history that we have suffered as a community. Their wins taught them a lot about rewards for hard work. I want to congratulate the head coach, Clint McCarthy; Paul Boxell; Liam Weeks; and Aurora O'Sullivan on the win—and, again, a big congratulations to all the players.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEA</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And, on behalf of all Novocastrians, congratulations.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bushmaster</title>
          <page.no>47</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to pay respect to those that designed, built and advocated for the ADF's Bushmaster infantry mobility vehicle that has saved not only countless Australian lives but also British, Dutch and, now, Ukrainian lives. The Bushmaster was used by the ADF in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and our soldiers saw it as crucial to their survival of IEDs and mines. After his Bushmaster drove over one, Mark Donaldson VC said, 'If it weren't for the Bushmaster, we wouldn't be here.' When travelling around Kabul in 2017, I certainly felt very safe travelling in a Bushmaster with Australian soldiers.</para>
<para>The Bushmaster would not have seen the light of day without committed people, including Mr Chev Viviers, who is an engineer at Thales and who introduced the Bushmaster's life-saving V-shaped hull, but also Lieutenant Colonel (Retired) Mark Eggler, ADF program manager and the senior systems engineer, who is with us with his wife, Watsana, today. Thank you very much, Mark. When you were involved from 2000-03, you made sure that the ADF did not drop this critical project that saved so many Australian lives. I'm proud that we've given 90 Bushmasters to Ukraine to keep them safe as well.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Rockhampton Ring Road</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LANDRY</name>
    <name.id>249764</name.id>
    <electorate>Capricornia</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Capricornia funds the wealth of the nation, but it seems the nation won't fund Capricornia. Labor have cut $1.6 billion in vital regional and rural project funding that the coalition fought for, with no regard for the costs and the losses that this will bring to businesses and their families in Central Queensland. The Prime Minister and the minister for infrastructure have delayed vital funding to the Rockhampton Ring Road. Hundreds of trucks must pass through 19 sets of traffic lights to travel through Rockhampton. Emergency service vehicles have delays, and they cannot get through the traffic on the existing bridges. The coalition fought for the Rockhampton Ring Road funding, but Labor have decided to delay it, after they had committed to it previously. Cost blowouts from $1 billion to $1.7 billion are being used to justify the axing. Well, Prime Minister, construction costs are only going to rise over the next two years. There's no better time than now to start construction on the Rockhampton Ring Road.</para>
<para>I joined over 500 people in Rockhampton last week to rally against the cuts the government has made to the ring road funding. Organisers are in Canberra today to plead the case to the Prime Minister. They are up in the gallery here now. As the federal member for Capricornia I do not accept the painful blow that the federal government has dealt to the regional and rural communities. This money needs to be reinstated now.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Housing</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
    <electorate>Macnamara</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>More than half the people in my electorate of Macnamara are renters. It's much higher than the national average of around 30 per cent. In Macnamara, it's more than one in two. Many people who are renting in Macnamara choose to live in my electorate because it is such a wonderful place to live. It is so vibrant. There is such a warm community. But it is difficult for families, and it's especially difficult for single people, as well, to get by on a low or a middle income. It's a misconception, I think, that the Reserve Bank's increases don't then flow onto the rental market as well. I think it's quite clear, from a lot of the feedback I'm hearing from my constituents, that landlords have had increases in their mortgage repayments, and that is being passed on to the renters as well. When you combine the natural rises in the costs of living, people are doing it pretty tough. So I wanted to come in here and acknowledge first that people are doing it tough.</para>
<para>Renters in my electorate are finding the rental prices quite alarming. Christina from Elwood wrote to me that she was recently issued with a 20 per cent rent increase. That would be challenging at any time, but it is particularly so after the last few years, with the lack of pay increases, with lockdowns and with childcare challenges. As a family of four who've lived in the same residence for the past five years, it was a devastating notice.</para>
<para>We are here to ease the cost of living. There has been significant work in the budget to ease cost-of-living pressures for families like Christina, but there's a lot more to do, and we recognise the pain that renters are feeling right now.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Armistice Day</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JOYCE</name>
    <name.id>e5d</name.id>
    <electorate>New England</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>At 11 o'clock on the 11th of the 11th we'll have Armistice Day, a commemoration of those who have served our nation. We're only asked to stop for a minute, but I bet there'll be a lot of people who will apparently find a cup of coffee or some other triviality more important than the 416,800 people from Australia who enlisted out of a population of merely five million. Sixty thousand of them were killed, 156,000 were wounded and 30,000 of them died when they got home from injuries sustained through the labours of the First World War—such things as gassing. And a lot of people are just buried in unmarked graves.</para>
<para>We put $3.7 million into finding these graves in order to mark them and treat them with some dignity but, unfortunately, that funding has been cut to $1.5 million. But they have found money for the Environmental Defenders Office, with $10 million, and they have found money for the Environmental Warriors. We should actually be finding money for the people who served our nation. Otherwise, when we say 'Lest we forget,' we don't really mean it. It's obvious that you forget them if you don't want to find their graves.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme</title>
          <page.no>48</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There has been a lot of conversation about the public's loss of faith in government across recent years. I want to say that I very much welcome the royal commission into the robodebt scandal, because I believe it might build back some faith in government if we get to the bottom of how that atrocity was committed by the former government.</para>
<para>I want to thank the member for Maribyrnong, the current minister, for his work in opposition to ensure that this happened and for his fight across those years—from 2015 through to November 2019. I know that I sat in my office in Werribee with many residents who had received these illegal, as we can say now, robodebt notices. This is what causes a lack of faith by the public: when governments do unconscionable things. I look forward to the findings of the royal commission, but I don't need a royal commission, and neither do my constituents, to know that many of them received notices of debt they didn't owe and that we had a government that persisted with a scheme that was illegal, was shown to be illegal and which hurt so many. Four hundred thousand Australians received these debt notices—400,000 of our fellow citizens! I hope that this royal commission builds some faith back in the government by the public.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Peter Veness Memorial Cup</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It's my obligation to report to the House that this weekend saw another chapter written in a longstanding and important parliamentary tradition. I speak of course of the annual cricket fixture played between the politicians and members of the Press Gallery for the Peter Veness Memorial Cup.</para>
<para>I am further obliged to report to the House a comfortable victory for the pollies, taking the field at the home of ACT cricket, the Phillip Oval. The press managed a respectable nine for 144 from their allotted 35 overs, with Andrew Probyn, despite sustaining injury, fighting on manfully for 34. Taking three for 24 for the pollies was the member for Bowman, in what we should note was his debut. In response, the pollies comfortably chased down that target with five overs to spare and with five wickets in hand. Congratulations need to go to the member for Casey for retiring on 50 not out, on what was also his debut.</para>
<para>It was a great day, played in great spirits and, to Andrew, who I note is too ashamed to join us in the chamber today—I understand he's watching from the bureau: you won't be able to drown your sorrows with a beer from the ABC beer fridge but you can always come to my office and help yourself to one!</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I give the call to the member for Bean for one minute.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Menslink</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>13:59</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DAVID SMITH</name>
    <name.id>276714</name.id>
    <electorate>Bean</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>For the last week, 30 community leaders from Canberra have been walking 142 kilometres along the Canberra Centenary Trail. They were doing this in support of one of the great Canberra charities and not-for-profits, Menslink. Menslink provides important mentoring services to young guys who are doing it tough and who actually need to find support and a role model at difficult times in their lives.</para>
<para>There were lots of blisters and a few injuries, but with the support of the greater Canberra community—and I was privileged to walk for 20 kilometres with them on Saturday—they were able to raise more than $300,000 for this vital and critical service for the people and young men of Canberra.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>49</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Street, Hon. Anthony Austin (Tony)</title>
          <page.no>49</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Reference to Federation Chamber</title>
            <page.no>50</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That resumption of the debate on the Prime Minister's motion of condolence in connection with the death of the Hon. Anthony Austin Street be referred to the Federation Chamber.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>MINISTRY</title>
        <page.no>51</page.no>
        <type>MINISTRY</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Temporary Arrangements</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:08</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I inform the House that the member for Shortland will be absent from parliament this week, as he is representing the Australian government at COP27. Questions relating to the defence industry portfolio and the international development and the Pacific portfolio will be answered by the Deputy Prime Minister.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>51</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>51</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DUTTON</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
    <electorate>Dickson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Last week I met with Louis and Tess, who run a cafe in Fairfield. Louis and Tess were promised that a Labor government would bring down power prices by $275 a year, but they are facing a 56 per cent rise in power prices over the next two years, and are forced to take measures like turning off the air conditioning to try to rein in surging costs. Will the Prime Minister apologise to families and businesses like the one Louis and Tess run for not delivering on his commitment to cut electricity prices by $275?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:09</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. We stand by the evidence, which is that renewables are the cheapest form of power and the best way to get power prices down is to get renewables up. That's exactly what this budget has done: nearly $24 billion for clean energy, investing in Marinus Link, renewable energy zones, offshore wind, pumped hydro, community batteries, solar banks. All of this is making up for a decade of neglect, a decade of denial, a decade of chaos.</para>
<para>On those opposite's watch, we had four gigawatts leave the system and one gigawatt come in. That's what occurred from those opposite. Common sense tells you that, with demand and supply, if you have less supply but demand is going up, then you will have pressure when it comes to prices. But, of course, those opposite were too busy fighting for power amongst themselves to worry about generating power for the country. That's essentially the problem that occurred. They had a rotation of ministers. Every time that they had the potential of an energy policy being adopted, even ones that could have been adopted with bipartisan support, instead of adopting them, they just rolled the leader. That's what occurred. They were too busy worrying about their own squabbles.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, the point of order is no relevance. I ask that you follow in the tradition of Speaker Jenkins and direct the Prime Minister to relate his material to the question at hand, not to some kind of historical excursion. He's looking for every reason to avoid answering a clear and direct question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Going to the point of order, Mr Speaker, this was hardly a tight question. It went for the full 30 seconds available and asked what the impacts of electricity prices were on a cafe in Fairfield. The Prime Minister is going to exactly why there's pressure on those families and those households and their businesses right now.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister is in order. The question was about power prices, and the question was about commitments about those prices. I'm listening carefully to the Prime Minister, and I give him the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks very much, Mr Speaker. Of course, what we know is that there are two big reasons why there is pressure on prices at the moment. One of which, as I've outlined already, is the failure of those opposite to build enough supply to generate power in the country because they were too busy worrying about power struggles within themselves. But the second, of course—and this might be a news release for those opposite—is the fact that the Russian invasion of Ukraine has led to global rises in power prices that have occurred throughout the entire world. Those opposite seem oblivious that this has occurred, but it is just a fact.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Deakin will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Aston and the member for Herbert will cease interjecting, so we can hear the member for Robertson.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Aged Care</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:13</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr REID</name>
    <name.id>300126</name.id>
    <electorate>Robertson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Aged Care. On Friday, the Fair Work Commission awarded a 15 per cent pay rise for aged-care workers. How does this put security, dignity and humanity back into the aged-care system for workers and older Australians?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WELLS</name>
    <name.id>264121</name.id>
    <electorate>Lilley</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Robertson for his question and acknowledge his service as an emergency department doctor over the years. He knows very well the importance of our election commitments, like 24/7 nurses back into residential aged care to take the pressure off our acute system and people like him in emergency departments across the country. I am confident that aged-care workers like Aditi and Taina at Aurrum Terrigal are grateful that he is there fighting in their corner.</para>
<para>And fighting we are, because, after only five months in office, we have now addressed 37 recommendations of the royal commission into aged care—37 of 148—compared with only nine of 148 that were addressed by the previous government in 15 long months, during which aged-care workers were crying out for assistance. Now, on Friday, aged-care workers had this result, and I want to thank those workers and all of the people who supported them—the families, the sector, the people in this place who have fought for a pay rise for aged-care workers for so very long—for bearing with us. It is hugely welcome; it is desperately needed, because a key part of the Albanese government's commitment to fixing the crisis in aged care is our steadfast support for the skilled and dedicated aged-care workforce who stand among our frontline pandemic heroes.</para>
<para>I'd specifically like to recognise our home-care workers who will receive this 15 per cent interim pay rise. They drive from home to home, often unpaid, trying to support and prioritise huge client loads. These workers play such an important part in helping people maintain their dignity and their independence as they want to age at home. So, prior to the election, we promised to support a meaningful pay rise for them and for people in residential aged care and, within weeks of being sworn into government, we delivered on that promise, and now, just five months into government, we have this decision: a meaningful pay rise and a very important first step.</para>
<para>We welcome Fair Work's interim decision to increase wages of direct care workers in both home and residential care by 15 per cent. Working in aged care is difficult. It is physically and emotionally demanding, and it is skilled work. Then you had COVID, which made everything 10 times worse. In May 2021, I and many of us on this side of the House met with Jude, whom you might remember for her fabulous pink hair. She said to us that she loves 'the work that you do, but love does not pay the bills'. It is for people like Jude that we have been fighting. It is for people like Jude that we will continue to fight, as this is step 1 of a three-step process to keep this process going.</para>
<para>I also acknowledge Teresa, a home-care worker whom many of us have seen in this place fighting for a pay rise for people like the colleagues that she wants to support. She can't afford to do the job that she loves. She can't afford to pay for the petrol to fill the tank to drive from home to home as a home-care worker. This 15 per cent interim pay rise will bring some relief to her and allow her to keep doing the job that she loves. That is the right thing to do; it's also the smart thing to do because we need to bring workers back into the aged-care workforce. We need to fill the staff shortages after nine years of neglect. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cost of Living</title>
          <page.no>52</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
    <electorate>Farrer</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer the Prime Minister to this, the front page of the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> on 2 May—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition knows my position on props.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Longman! I'll ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to begin her question again—without the use of a prop.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LEY</name>
    <name.id>00AMN</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister, and I refer the Prime Minister to the front page of the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> on 2 May this year, titled 'Life will be "cheaper" under me', where the Prime Minister said: 'Labor has real, lasting plans for cheaper electricity and cheaper mortgages.'</para>
<para>Given that the budget confirmed power prices will rise 56 per cent and that interest rates have already gone up six times since the election, how can the Prime Minister seriously suggest that life is cheaper under Labor? Why won't he say sorry for yet another broken promise?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. I specifically asked the Deputy Leader of the Opposition not to use a prop. If she does that again, she'll be asked to leave the House; I can't be clearer than that. That goes for every member in the House.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Nice try. I give the call to the Prime Minister.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I always read the front page of the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>, Mr Speaker, so I did read that; I read the front page of every newspaper in this country to try to keep on top of where things are. A couple weeks later, in May, the first interest rate increase by the Reserve Bank occurred—on their watch. I thought they were in government at that point in time. But what we also know is that there was scheduled to be an increase in wholesale energy prices at the same time.</para>
<para>But I didn't get to read about that on the front page of the <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline>. I didn't get to read about it, and I wonder why that is the case because it was scheduled to occur during the campaign, just like the interest rate increase occurred during the campaign. We knew about one, but we didn't know about the other. We didn't know about the other because someone—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Catherine King</name>
    <name.id>00AMR</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Who? Who was it?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>someone introduced—actually introduced—a change in the law so that people couldn't know that there was this wholesale price increase scheduled to occur. What date did they pick? The election was on 21 May, so do you think they picked a day before 21 May or after 21 May? Hands up those who think they picked a day after! You are all right. They picked a day after because they were not transparent. They were not transparent about what they had intended as a result of this.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Has the Prime Minister concluded his answer? Order! When the House comes to order, I'd like to hear the member for Chisholm.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wages</title>
          <page.no>53</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question is to the Prime Minister. What steps has the government taken to deliver on its commitment to get wages moving again?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Chisholm very much for her question. On one of my favourite days of the election campaign, I was with the member for Chisholm when I was asked if I supported a pay rise of a dollar for people who were on the minimum wage. On that day I said, 'Absolutely, absolutely.' The response of the then government was that that was loose. They said it was irresponsible to support a pay increase for those Australian heroes of the pandemic, those people who are on the minimum wage and who were looking after Australians during that pandemic.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Mitchell will cease interjecting.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They said: 'No, no, we can't have a dollar increase, not a dollar an hour, because that will ruin the economy. The sky will fall.' That was a decade of low wages under those opposite being used as a deliberate design feature of economic policy. But we on this side of the House are getting wages moving again.</para>
<para>One of the first things we did, of course, was to make a submission to the Fair Work Commission saying that those people who are on the minimum wage deserve not to go backwards. The Fair Work Commission granted an increase of 5.2 per cent, more than the then inflation rate of 5.1 per cent. On Friday there was further good news because the Fair Work Commission granted aged-care workers a 15 per cent wage rise. When I was asked whether I welcomed that, I said, 'Absolutely.' Those opposite presided over a growing crisis in aged care but had contempt for those workers in aged care who worked under such critical circumstances during the pandemic in particular. They are heroes of the pandemic and they deserve more than our thanks. They deserve a pay rise, and that was something that was acknowledged by the Fair Work Commission.</para>
<para>On the weekend, on the Sunshine Coast, I met with Deb and Glenn. They told me how much this pay rise means to them. They're aged-care workers who go to work, who love their work, who love the people they care for.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Fairfax will cease interjecting.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr A</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They certainly don't do it for the money; they do it for the care of fellow Australians. The fact that those opposite find this somehow a contestable issue, when I am praising aged-care workers who look after our oldest Australians, just shows the contempt they have for older Australians who deserve dignity and respect. This week we'll have a chance with the secure jobs, better pay bill to actually take those principles even further and make sure we have an industrial relations system that works for people. (<inline font-style="italic">Time expired</inline>)</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</title>
        <page.no>54</page.no>
        <type>DISTINGUISHED VISITORS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Clinical Trials Patients Summit Delegation</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to inform the House that present in the gallery today are a group from the Clinical Trials Patients Summit delegation. On behalf of the House I extend a very warm welcome to you all.</para>
<para>Honourable members: Hear, hear!</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</title>
        <page.no>54</page.no>
        <type>QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is for the Prime Minister. Does the Prime Minister agree that real, effective wage rises in low-paid industries can be achieved through the awards, as has been shown this week in the aged-care awards, rather than through complex IR legislation that wasn't taken to the election, brings in small business and may delay wage rises in protracted negotiations?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'll start, and I'll ask the minister to continue. And I thank the member for Wentworth for her question and for her constructive engagement in this House. I think, though, that it is not credible to say that we did not take our policy to lift wages to the election. We were very clear that we wanted to lift wages. We were clear that we would make submissions to the Fair Work Commission about those on the minimum wage, about those in the aged-care workforce. We were very clear that we would make secure work an objective of the Fair Work Act. We were very clear that we would make gender pay equity an objective of the Fair Work Act.</para>
<para>And one of the things that's very clear and is why we need to change the industrial relations system is not only that real wages have gone backwards over the previous decade, as a deliberate policy of the then government, but also that the feminised industries—people like our cleaners, our early learning educators, our aged-care workers and our disability care workers—have copped the brunt of the holding back of wages in this country. A fairer country deserves a fairer industrial relations system. That's what our secure work better pay bill will do. We believe there is a need to reform the system. That was something we took and that we engaged very much on with business, and continue to do so, as well as with unions. We did so at the Jobs and Skills Summit here. It is one of the challenges that we need to meet. The Reserve Bank governor made it very clear that we need to lift wages, that it is something that was holding back the economy. That's why our legislation is worthy of support by this parliament, because we believe that very clearly we have a mandate for it. But I'd ask the minister to continue.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:27</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I reiterate that thankyou to the member for Wentworth for the way in which she's been engaged with this debate and the further conversations that are yet to happen. But I do have to note, as to why we don't just rely on the award system, that people who are on enterprise agreements earn more, and businesses with enterprise agreements get more flexibility and get more productivity. Enterprise agreements do provide a better outcome, but at the moment they are largely less available if you're a smaller business or a medium-size business and less available if it's a feminised workforce. If we can deliver the pay rise and the productivity, it's a much better outcome.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Pensions and Benefits</title>
          <page.no>54</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SCRYMGOUR</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
    <electorate>Lingiari</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to be Minister for Government Services. What information has the royal commission discovered in its first week of public hearings that would otherwise have remained secret? Who were the relevant ministers during the operation the robodebt scheme?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
    <electorate>Maribyrnong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you, Member for Lingiari, for your question. At the conclusion of the first week of public hearings of the robodebt royal commission Australians have learned that the previous coalition government received departmental and legal advice that the robodebt scheme was unlawful from its inception. Specifically, Australians have learnt, firstly that, in 2014, at the dawn of the robodebt scheme, the then Liberal-National government received advice from their own lawyers that the scheme was 'likely illegal'. Secondly, we've learned that the former Department of Social Services director of payments and integrity, who was responsible for seeking the 2014 internal legal advice, had warned that income averaging to raise welfare debts was 'likely unlawful'. He said he and his team were almost immediately concerned about the proposal, which he also described as 'unethical'. The same official said that the DSS legal advice was 'black and white'. It should have ended the proposal. Indeed, he likened the robodebt scheme to be Dallas buyers club scam of speculative invoicing of unsuspecting victims. Thirdly, we've learned that in 2018 top law firm Clayton Utz provided advice that the scheme was not able to be justified.</para>
<para>Government members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! members on my right will cease interjecting.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There's a royal commission underway at the moment and there is a well-respected principle that the House, the parliament, not interfere in judicial processes or, indeed, other bodies—</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Attorney-General will case interjecting.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and as practice itself notes, royal commission proceedings have a quasi-judicial character. So it is an important public policy question whether the minister ought to be offering a running commentary on what is an important process that is underway right now. That is an important question, Mr Speaker, for you to determine.</para>
<para>Governme nt members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Members on my right! There's far too much noise.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>To the point of order: it's been raised before and so the Manager of Opposition Business, I presume, knows, because he's going to keep reading from page 524 of practice, which is the quote he just read, where it acknowledges that, in the ordinary event, debate is allowed on royal commissions in the House: certainly not on jury trials, but certainly yes on royal commissions.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm listening carefully to the Minister for Government Services. I thank the manager for raising that point.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SHORTEN</name>
    <name.id>00ATG</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians have learned three things. Firstly, the internal legal advice was that this was most likely illegal. Secondly, the former director in charge of integrity and payments said the scheme should have been stopped. Thirdly, top law firm Clayton Utz provided advice in 2018 that the scheme was not able to be justified. This prompted an internal email saying that it was 'catastrophic'. Clayton Utz offered to rework the advice. But for these this royal commission, these three revelations that the Liberal-National government received departmental and legal advice that robodebt was illegal from 2014 onwards would never have seen the light of day.</para>
<para>The other part of the member for Lingiari's questions was: who were the relevant ministers during the operation of this unlawful scheme? They were: the minister for Cook, the Minister for Social Services, 2014-15; the former member for Pearce, Minister for Social Services, 2015-17; the member for Wannon, Minister for Human Services and Minister for Social Services; our friend the member for Bradfield, Minister for Families and Social Services; the member for Fadden, Minister for Human Services; and the member for Aston, Minister for Human Services.</para>
<para>In conclusion, there have always been three explanations for the conduct of ministers in this operation: first, they were obeying the law and it was lawful; or second, it wasn't lawful, but they just didn't know what was happening beneath their noses, so they were essentially negligent; or three, that they did know but didn't care. We've eliminated the, 'It was lawful, Your Honour' defence. We wait to see what the answer is to the remaining two explanations.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Aston is warned.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>55</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
    <electorate>Hume</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer. I refer to the Prime Minister's opinion piece on 24 April 2022, which read:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australia needs a government that will accept responsibility and not seek to blame others …</para></quote>
<para>The Prime Minister's first budget confirms electricity prices are going up by 56 per cent, inflation will hit eight per cent and unemployment is set to rise. Will the Prime Minister take responsibility—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The member for Hume will resume his seat. There is far too much noise. I cannot hear where the question is directed, and I can't hear the question. I'm going to ask the member for Hume to begin again, and I want the House to remain silent to show him the courtesy that he deserves. I give the call to the member for Hume.</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TAYLOR</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's opinion piece on 24 April 2022, which read:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australia needs a government that will accept responsibility and not seek to blame others …</para></quote>
<para>The Prime Minister's first budget confirms electricity prices are going up by 56 per cent. Inflation will hit eight per cent and unemployment is set to rise. Will the Prime Minister take responsibility for a budget with no plans to deal with these pressures?</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I give the call to the Prime Minister, who will be heard in silence.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>They say all roads lead to Rome. But all Rhodes scholarships clearly don't lead anywhere.</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my left will remain silent.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The shadow Treasurer had a moment of clarity recently. This is what he had to say about energy policy. He said this:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The development of interconnectors and transmission is critical to bringing new generation capacity into the energy system, while shoring up reliability and affordability across state borders.</para></quote>
<para>Pretty good statement. Well done, Angus. Then he went on to say, 'Thousands of kilometres of new transmission is likely to be needed to connect new generation.' So you compare the rhetoric that they have and they had before the election, where they spoke about—they were going to have all of this new generation but, in fact, they had four gigs out and only one gig in. They now are trying to run a scare campaign about transmission and that we should have an energy system without transmission that completely contradicts what they said before the election. They didn't do anything about it. They had some 22 energy policies and didn't land one. So it's no wonder that my friend the Treasurer, here—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Macnamara will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and we've only got one, can't get a question from the shadow Treasurer. All we get is recycled questions from the bloke who was the largest failure—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister will pause.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>When the House comes to order, I'll hear from the member for Hume on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Tay</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Relevance. It was a very clear question: whether the Prime Minister will take responsibility for his failed budget.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Resume your seat. The question was broad about the Prime Minister's budget, about inflation, about prices and other aspects, and—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, Deputy Leader of the Opposition. While I'm speaking and ruling on the member for Hume, I'd ask the House to remain silent. The Prime Minister is in order and I give him the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In the point of order, the shadow Treasurer then finally got around to asking a question about the budget. But he did it in a point of order rather than ask the question to the Treasurer, because he's simply not up to the task of taking on the Treasurer when it comes to economic policy.</para>
<para>Those opposite were responsible for a decade of denial, a decade of failure, 22 different policy announcements and didn't land one—not a single one—because they were too interested in the power struggles of their internals and not worried about powering up Australia by fixing up the energy sector. We will do it. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired) </inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>56</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HILL</name>
    <name.id>86256</name.id>
    <electorate>Bruce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Could the Treasurer explain to the House, in three minutes or less, how the budget responds to the challenge of rising inflation?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks to the member for Bruce for asking that question with characteristic panache and class. The budget we handed down nearly two weeks ago was overwhelmingly influenced by the inflation challenge, and it was primarily a response to that challenge. It had to be an inflation focused budget because inflation is the No. 1 challenge facing our economy, right now, just as it is for economies right around the world. That meant that the budget had to deliver cost-of-living relief, it had to invest in the drivers of the economy and it had to start cleaning up the mess that was left to us from the wasted decade, and it had to do all of those things without adding to inflation. That's exactly what our first budget delivered by providing targeted cost-of-living relief in areas like cheaper early childhood education and cheaper medicines; by investing in the capabilities of our people and the capacity of our economy with fee-free TAFE and more university places; with the National Reconstruction Fund and our Powering Australia plan; and, most importantly of all, when it comes to this inflation challenge, keeping spending under control and finding responsible savings in the budget.</para>
<para>This responsible approach to the budget marks a total change from what we got from those opposite over the previous nine years. In our budget, there is an average 0.3 per cent annual real spending growth over the forward estimates compared to an average of 2.6 per cent a year in their budgets—and that was before the pandemic. More than 90 per cent of tax revenue upgrades are returned to the bottom line in our budget, compared to 40 per cent by the previous government. There is $22 billion of savings in our budget, but not a single cent of savings on the expenditure side in the March budget handed down by those opposite. We knew we had to act differently from our predecessors. We knew we had to be more responsible, and, because we did that, this budget doesn't make our inflation problem worse. In fact, if we had done what they did and spend all of the revenue upgrades—on 14 occasions they spent every cent of the revenue upgrades—that would have added another half a percentage point to inflation over the next year and interest rates would have to go even higher as a consequence.</para>
<para>So the budget was right and responsible. It was defined by the times and it was designed for the times. It will help steer us through the difficult days that are ahead of us so that we can build an economy that does get wages moving again after a wasted decade of wage stagnation. It will deal with the aged-care crisis that we inherited, the energy policy chaos that we inherited and the labour shortages that we inherited, and it will begin to deal with the trillion dollars of debt that those opposite left behind with almost nothing to show for it.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. The Heritage Hotel in Dorrigo in my electorate of Cowper has their electricity supply contract due to be renewed next year. They've been informed that the hotel's annual electricity price is set to increase by $25,000, or almost 60 per cent, in 2023. Why are businesses like the Heritage Hotel in Dorrigo having to pay for the Prime Minister's broken promise to cut power prices?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Cowper for his question. Indeed, Dorrigo is a great town. He is very privileged to represent such a great local community. You might like to tell the small business, though, that, as a result of the hidden power price increase, power prices for small businesses in New South Wales—according to the release on, of course, 25 May, so I think it's very hard for you to blame this side of the House—were due to go up by 19.7 per cent.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Hume will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Over there, when they had a Liberal Party in Western Australia, they were led once by Richard Court, the former WA Liberal Premier, and he's had something to say over the last couple of days. I agree with his comment in which he said that the past decade of national energy policy has been 'a slow-moving train wreck'.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Wages</title>
          <page.no>57</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:43</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. What will the Albanese Labor government's 'secure jobs, better pay' bill do to get wages moving after a decade where wages were kept deliberately low? Has the government considered responses to the bill?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Solomon who shares the concern that in Australia, we need to get wages moving.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And I hear opposite, 'Oh, we all do.' I hear, 'We all do', from those opposite! Ten years of wanting to make sure that they didn't move! Ten years of keeping them deliberately low! And look at the different measures that we've taken already.</para>
<para>So, when we took the measure to put the submission in for the annual wage review, that was what they described as being a 'loose unit' with the economy; that was what they described as being 'reckless and dangerous'. That's what delivered a 5.2 per cent increase on the minimum wage. Then, they also refused to put in a submission backing aged-care workers. Well, I challenge those opposite: go to the aged-care centres around your own electorates now and let them know that, in regard to the 15 per cent that's been awarded, you were opposed to a government fighting for that. But they won't have to wait for you to do that, because those opposite are already making it clear that they're opposed to legislation that will get wages moving.</para>
<para>There is no doubt that if you're on an agreement you get paid more than if you're on the award. New figures came out today, and the Fair Work Commission is now regularly releasing figures as to what the pay increases are that are coming if you are on a registered agreement. They are at an average of 3.6 per cent. That's at exactly the same time that wages, at the moment, are running at 2.6 per cent. Now, we know why those opposite oppose it. The shadow Treasurer gave away why he opposed it. In one of the most extraordinary arguments against our bill, he said it pushes up wages. It pushes up wages; that was his reason for opposing it.</para>
<para>But it went to a new level today. And I do have to thank the Leader of the Opposition; I'm so glad that, when you did the reshuffle, you kept Michaelia Cash where she was. Remember that previously Senator Cash had said Labor policy would end the weekend, from which we had presumed that Monday to Friday were therefore still available. Today, the bill will potentially close down Australia! It will close down Australia! Those opposite have got a real sense of nuance: it will close down Australia.</para>
<para>Well, I'll you what: people who are watching wages run at 2.6 per cent while inflation is running at 7.3 per cent and is projected to reach eight percent want action now. They want the parliament to act now, and when they hear those opposite saying, 'Can't we just wait another month? Can't we just wait a little bit longer?' they know that they were kept waiting for 10 years while wages were deliberately kept low, and they should not be left waiting. They should not be left waiting in a situation where it becomes harder to make ends meet because the parliament has not yet acted.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>58</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question goes to the Prime Minister. The government's budget has disproven the RepuTex modelling behind Labor's <inline font-style="italic">Powering </inline><inline font-style="italic">Australia</inline> energy plan. I note that over the weekend the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water removed reference to that modelling from its website. Since Treasury and the department don't trust Labor's modelling, why should the Australian people?</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting. The member for Fairfax was heard—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Nationals! The member for Fairfax was heard in silence, so will be the minister. I give him the call.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
    <electorate>McMahon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the honourable member for the question about modelling. Yes, the modelling commissioned by the Labor Party when in opposition is very important, because it underlines the fact that renewable energy is the cheapest form of energy. It underlines the fact that renewable energy will create jobs across our country.</para>
<para>Now, we understand that. Any sensible economist understands that. Those opposite are still struggling with that. They're still struggling with it. They think that the cheapest form of energy is nuclear.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for Fairfax! The member for Fairfax has asked his question.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition was asked the other week about nuclear energy being more expensive and he said, 'No, no, no. That's an assertion by Chris Bowen. It's not supported by the facts from Europe or North America.'</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Fairfax is warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Now, the Leader of the Opposition is onto me. He's onto me. I did call the CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator regarding the GenCost report and asked them to write that nuclear energy is the most expensive form of energy. And then I got onto Stanford University and I asked them. Then I got onto Harvard University and I asked them. Then I got onto the International Energy Agency and I asked them. Then I got onto the international nuclear report and I asked them. These are all groups who say that nuclear energy is the most expensive form of energy, but it has passed by the Leader of the Opposition.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Member for O'Connor, I'm trying to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Mr Speaker, my point of order is on relevance. You have previously asked a minister to return to a question because he's 'had a preamble'. The minister has had a preamble. He needs to answer the question: why has the modelling been taken down from the website?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question contained more than that one component. I'm listening carefully to the minister, and I ask him to return to the question specifically regarding the modelling.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We're happy to talk about modelling.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Fairfax!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BOWEN</name>
    <name.id>DZS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I look forward to the opposition releasing modelling on the impact of nuclear energy on power prices. I look forward to the opposition releasing information as to where the nuclear power plants will go. Will it be in Yeppoon or in Yeppen? Where will it be, Mr Speaker! That's what we want to know. The LNP says 'local nuclear power plant'.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Fairfax was warned numerous times. He will now leave the chamber under 94(a).</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The member for Fairfax then left the chamber.</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LIM</name>
    <name.id>300130</name.id>
    <electorate>Tangney</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. How will the government's plan for cheaper child care benefit Australian families and the economy?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Tangney for his question and for his passionate advocacy of cheaper child care to benefit his electorate. What we know is that cheaper child care will be good for productivity. It'll be good for workforce participation and good for population growth. It's good for families. It takes pressure off family budgets. It is also, of course, good for children, given that 90 per cent of human brain development occurs in the first five years.</para>
<para>Last week, I had the opportunity, with the member for Macnamara, of visiting the Avenue Children's Centre & Kindergarten. There I met Louise Hird with her son Jack and Laura Hill with her son Levi. It was Halloween. The kids were dressed up as superheroes. They were all very keen. What the parents there were keen on was the fact that they now have a government that recognises the importance of early learning. The workers—the educators—were keen as well, about the fact that they now have a government that respects the work that they do.</para>
<para>The member for Boothby and I then went on to Goodstart Early Learning in Somerton Park. The kids there were growing their very own vegetable garden, learning about food nutrition.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Nationals!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>There were also learning about cooperation and the skills that you learn at an early learning centre. This is something that parents value and, certainly, this government values. I also met Honey and Chilli, the centre's little guinea pigs. Kids get to take turns taking them home, because many of the kids at the childcare centre don't live in houses where they are allowed to have a permanent pet. It makes a big difference to them.</para>
<para>I even went to Baringa in the member for Fisher's electorate last week as well. There, at the Sunshine Coast, we have a growing community full of families, who said to me, very clearly, 'Thank you for the government's action which will make child care cheaper, which will be able to help—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Baringa's on the Sunshine Coast in a region, in Queensland.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Nationals will cease interjecting. The Leader of the Nationals is warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I do have to educate those Queenslanders opposite about where places are. This is a brand-new centre in what is a growing new suburb of Baringa. I thank the children there for giving me a book called <inline font-style="italic">If</inline><inline font-style="italic"> I was Prime Minister</inline>. They wrote and illustrated it themselves. We won't be giving free ice cream or bringing back dinosaurs, but we can make child care cheaper.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Climate Change</title>
          <page.no>59</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms WATSON-BROWN</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
    <electorate>Ryan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, your government wants to host the 2026 COP climate summit with the Pacific, yet Australia is one of the world's biggest fossil fuel exporters, with a further 114 new coal and gas projects in the pipeline. Prime Minister, to help secure the hosting of the global climate summit, will you now commit to not opening any coal and gas projects?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for her question and for her engagement and her passionate advocacy for action on climate change. The government will be implementing the plan that we took to the election: our Powering Australia plan, our plan to reduce emissions by 43 per cent by 2030, our plan to engage with our Pacific neighbours. At the Pacific Islands Forum, which Prime Minister Bainimarama hosted in Fiji, it was clear to me that the entry card to get into discussions around the globe is action on climate change. It's taking climate change seriously. And the fact is that the communique from that summit, from the Pacific Islands Forum, welcomed the Australian government's new position as it's been welcomed around the world, as it's been welcomed in North America by President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau; as it's been welcomed in Europe by the European Commission, as it has been welcomed and will be welcomed at the COP, which the minister will be attending next week on behalf of the Australian government.</para>
<para>Australia is now back, engaged with the global challenge of dealing with climate change, and we know that one nation alone can't deal with it. We need to be part of bringing the community with us and we need to be part of bringing the whole globe with us as well, which is why I've been very pleased with the discussions I've had. In most countries, this is not a partisan issue. I discussed it with the new Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, just last week. The first issue that we discussed as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom—a conservative prime minister—and an Australian Labor Prime Minister was action on climate change and our common positions on that. It was just like when I had that discussion with Prime Minister Johnson when he was in office and with Prime Minister Truss when she was in office as well.</para>
<para>The extraordinary thing about when you engage with international leaders—and we will be engaging to secure the hosting of the COP in a few years time and we will be attempting to host that with our Pacific neighbours. We're receiving strong support from around the Pacific for that objective. It would be a good thing for Australia to do, and I look forward to success, to notifying the parliament and for us to work to host what is a very important international event.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Child Care</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Early Childhood Education. How will the Albanese Labor government's plan for more affordable early childhood education and care alleviate pressure on families struggling with the cost of living?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>14:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr ALY</name>
    <name.id>13050</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Bennelong for his question and acknowledge his commitment to young families in the electorate of Bennelong, 9,400 of which will benefit from the legislation that we introduced to make early childhood education and care more affordable for 1.2 million families right across Australia, including 9,400 in Bennelong.</para>
<para>As the member knows, access to affordable early childhood education is great for our children. As the Prime Minister mentioned in his earlier answer—rightly so—90 per cent of a child's brain develops before the age of five. A vital part of a child's development is that access to good-quality early childhood education. But it's also a vital part of our economy—a very important part of our economy—because it's important for parents, particularly for women, who happen to be the primary caregivers most of the time, who are looking for opportunities in the workforce.</para>
<para>But, of course, even when women get those opportunities in the workforce there are barriers to them participating. Whether it's an opportunity for further study, to develop their careers or to take on more hours, there are structural barriers—and the cost of affordable early childhood education is one of those barriers. By making early childhood education more affordable, what we're actually doing is achieving substantive equality for women—something that those opposite voted against. They voted against substantive equality for women. That's because it's not just about providing opportunity but about creating the conditions under which women can undertake and take advantage of those opportunities by being able to go back to work, to take on extra study or to take on extra hours.</para>
<para>But, like the member for Bennelong and the members on this side of the House, I've also met with families in my own electorate of Cowan who would like to be able to go to work and would like to supplement their household income. This is particularly at a time when we know families and households are doing it tough. But they can't do it because of the competing pressures on the family budget. What our government, the Albanese Labor government, did within five months of being elected was to make early childhood education more affordable for 1.2 million families right across Australia. That's not just good for children and not just good for parents, particularly women who want to take advantage of those opportunities and achieve substantive equality, but it's also good for household budgets. That's because it means that parents can go out, earn more and alleviate those cost-of-living pressures that we're seeing at the moment.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Energy</title>
          <page.no>60</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, under your budget how much will gas prices go up by?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
    <electorate>Grayndler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for his question. Remember that there was a time when questions used to get asked on this side of the House—by dixer—and they spoke about the gas led recovery? The gas led recovery! They spoke about how—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Dr Chalmers</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Then they put Angus in charge of it!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>They actually appointed Andrew Liveris, who I will be meeting with this afternoon, actually. He's a quality person. He's someone who has been put in charge—oh, seriously!</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Prime Minister will pause. The Prime Minister has been answering the question for 30 seconds, so I'll hear from the Leader of the Opposition out of courtesy.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr D</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's on relevance, Mr Speaker. The question was: Prime Minister, under your budget how much will gas prices go up by? It was nothing broader than that, as tight as you've requested and he refuses to answer a basic question.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question was about—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition has raised his point of order, he may resume his seat. The question was about gas and the Prime Minister is referring to gas. I'm listening carefully to his answer, and I give—</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order, on my left! I give him the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm certainly talking about gas, which is what the question was about. Not the gas coming from those opposite, but the gas in the system that we need! What we used to have were questions of the minister—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Dutton</name>
    <name.id>00AKI</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Do you know the answer or not? Somebody pass it to him, for goodness sake!</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Opposition will cease yelling across the table!</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANES</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>He's very angry, Mr Speaker!</para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The House will come to order! I'm trying to hear the Prime Minister but the yelling on the left makes it almost impossible. The Prime Minister will be heard in silence. I give him the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thanks very much, Mr Speaker. I'm talking about gas. We used to hear about the gas led recovery. And why the gas led recovery is so called is important in terms of price, because that was envisaging this massive increase in supply. But of course it didn't happen—it didn't happen! There wasn't anything that came on line as a result of this big review. That was going to be the big recovery post the pandemic; it was going to be a gas led recovery.</para>
<para>I'll give you the big tip: the government didn't change in 2020, or even in 2021. The fact is that those opposite presided over a system whereby four gigawatts went out and one gigawatt went in—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the Nationals is on a warning. I'd ask him to stop interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and that has an impact, in terms of supply. What this government has done—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Longman and the member for Bowman are both warned.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>unlike what happened when we came into office—we heard all sorts of rhetoric from those opposite about how the lights were going to go out, the system was going to fail, and, of course, that didn't happen, because the minister for energy got together with the states and territories—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ALBANESE</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>and delivered an outcome. Then, of course, we heard that there was going to be a shortage in gas supply. We were told the shortage would be 56 petajoules. Instead of that we delivered 157, an increase of more than 100 over what was anticipated. We did that on the basis of the heads of agreement that was negotiated by our very fine Minister for Resources. So if those opposite want to have— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired) </inline></para>
<para>Opposition members interjecting—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! There is far too much noise on my left.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Cybersecurity</title>
          <page.no>61</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms FERNANDO</name>
    <name.id>299964</name.id>
    <electorate>Holt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Assistant Treasurer. How is the Albanese Labor government helping protect Australians from scammers after a decade of inaction?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
    <electorate>Whitlam</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Holt for her question and congratulate her on her election to this parliament. From Columbo in Sri Lanka to the federal parliament, hers is a magnificent migrant story adding to the lustre of this parliament.</para>
<para>Today I had the great honour of announcing the establishment of a national anti-scam centre, fulfilling an election commitment. It will monitor and respond, in real time, the pandemic of scams that is going up and up and up. We will have new codes of practice and we will bring together the capacity and the expertise across the Commonwealth, state and territory governments, regulators, but, importantly, telecommunications companies, banks and the finance sector—bringing together the expertise to ensure that we can track scams down and protect consumers. Our objective is to ensure that, for scammers, Australia is the destination of last resort.</para>
<para>Scams have gone through the roof. We learnt today, from the ACCC, $2 billion have been lost to scammers over the last 12 months, $4 billion projected over this year. The Minister for Home Affairs advises us that every seven minutes there is an attempted data breach in this country: average cost to business and households, $40,000. It is easy to dismiss this as something which is just praying upon the helpless and the gullible. Yes, we have a lot of work to do to protect people who have disadvantage and who are vulnerable to scams, but it is not just them. From the highest offices in the country to the farmers in the regions, all have fallen victim to scams—crypto scams, romance scams, investment scams, invoice interception scams.</para>
<para>This is a legacy that we have inherited. The member for Deakin, who's had a fair bit to say throughout question time, has just gone quiet. There's a very good reason that he's just gone quiet. This issue is beyond politics but it's not beyond incompetence and it's not beyond indifference, because on his watch it doubled and then it doubled again. The member for Deakin had more people working on branch stacking in his office than the ACCC had working on this project. This is his legacy! No wonder he is so—</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The Assistant Treasurer will resume his seat. The House will come to order. I know where the manager is going and I give him the call.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Fletcher</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>This breaches a whole series of standing orders—reflection on members, offensive words. He ought to be very firmly told that this must not happen again.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I uphold the point of order and ask the minister to withdraw the point he made about the member for Deakin—to assist the House.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr JONES</name>
    <name.id>A9B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Withdrawn. But this is a legacy of negligence, and it is on their heads, and Australian businesses and households are paying for it. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petroleum Resource Rent Tax</title>
          <page.no>62</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Treasurer. Over the last three decades, Australia's petroleum tax has collected a paltry amount of revenue from the sale of our natural resources, compared with other countries. While Norway collected trillions of dollars of wealth for their citizens, Australia's petroleum tax has declined from 19 per cent of total oil and gas sector revenue in 1992 to just one per cent in 2020. What will the government do to fix Australia's broken petroleum tax system?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr CHALMERS</name>
    <name.id>37998</name.id>
    <electorate>Rankin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Mackellar for her question and for her engagement on the budget and on the PRRT in particular. It's worth the House noting that, with the member for Mackellar's one question, she has asked more questions about the budget in the last two question times than the shadow Treasurer has—already, with that one question.</para>
<para>As the member for Mackellar knows, the war in Ukraine is pushing up, substantially, the price of gas, and that has a range of consequences which I'll come to in a moment, but it also does have consequences for the budget. What we've seen in the last little while is an increase in the PRRT take, but I do understand that there is a view in the community, perhaps a view that the member for Mackellar shares, judging by the question—that there is an appetite for Australians to get a decent return on the resources that they own. But it is worth noting that, even in the budget I handed down a couple of Tuesdays ago, the PRRT take for last year was about $1.6 billion, and for this year it's expected to be about $2.6 billion. That's about $200 million more than was anticipated before the election, and next year it's a little bit more than was anticipated as well. In addition to the PRRT take going up a little bit over the next couple of years, the company tax take is also up, as people know, and we've got policies and plans to make multinational taxes fairer as well.</para>
<para>When it comes to the gas market, we've talked about the consequences for the budget when gas prices are high. But there are, obviously, consequences as well for Australian industry and for Australians everywhere when gas prices are high. And that's why our priority—whether it's the good work of the Minister for Resources in negotiating more supply; whether it's the work that we are doing, together with the minister for industry, the minister for energy and others—has been to strengthen the code of conduct to make it mandatory and to introduce considerations of price into that work. This is important work.</para>
<para>When it comes to the PRRT, there's an element of bipartisanship, in the sense that the member for Cook and the former member for Kooyong introduced a review of the PRRT that the Treasury is yet to conclude. When they conclude, obviously I'll take their recommendations seriously. But, even if we were to go down the path being proposed by a number of people around changing the PRRT, that wouldn't change some of the near-term pressures on the gas market and on the energy market more particularly as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. So our near-term focus is on the code of conduct and on price and supply. We think that's where our time is best spent, without taking some of these other options off the table when it comes to future tax arrangements.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Floods</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My question is to the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories. How is the Albanese Labor government ensuring that regional communities devastated by flooding have the funding they need to rebuild local infrastructure?</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBAIN</name>
    <name.id>281988</name.id>
    <electorate>Eden-Monaro</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you to the member for Macquarie, who has experienced not only bushfires but floods over the last couple of years. I know how important that engagement with your local councils in the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury has been, and thank you for the advice that you've provided to me and my office. As a mayor of a former regional council we experienced nine declare natural disasters in four years and the impact on communities, on businesses and on livelihoods is extensive and ongoing. Right now we're experiencing devastating floods. Over 100 local council areas across four states are currently declared natural disaster areas.</para>
<para>I have been liaising with a number of mayors across the country, as well as members across this chamber, on the impacts being experienced by communities at this point in time. The cost to local councils is extraordinary. In my own electorate Cooma, Adelong, Yass, Murrumbateman and Bega have experienced flooding, as well as a number of other localities. In Adelong residents were ordered to evacuate, cars were swept away and paddock fences were erased—just like so many other places across our regions. In Gunning, not far from here, in the member for Hume's electorate, two lives were sadly lost. My sincere condolences go out to their families and to all families that have lost loved ones in these floods.</para>
<para>The impact to our agricultural sector is immense, from damaged crops to livestock deaths, to delays in getting machinery on farms to start to repair some of that damage. The government has acted quickly though to make disaster assistance payments available. I want to thank Minister Watt for the timeliness in his response to this. Over one million disaster payments have already been made to date. Disaster recovery funding arrangements are already in place with state and territory governments. We are providing on-ground assistance to them.</para>
<para>In the budget, our government committed $38.3 million over four years to boost federal disaster response payments, in particular to the veteran-led Disaster Relief Australia, because we know we need boots on the ground when disasters hit. We're providing financial support to people in Victoria, Tasmania, New South Wales and Queensland affected by ongoing and extensive flooding. We are investing heavily in mitigation and resilience—over $1 billion over five years for mitigation resilience projects. We want state and territory governments to partner with us to build things like flood levies and fire breaks, and invest in community resilience projects. We have to be there not only now but well into the future. Grants of up to $25,000 are available to support small businesses and primary producers impacted by October flooding with clean-up and restoration activities.</para>
<para>This year we invested an additional $250 million under the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. There will be a particular focus on regional roads to enable those local governments to deal with the impacts on their roads.</para>
<para>Roads to recovery continues to provide an important source of funding for our local councils. We need to be here not only—<inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Albanese</name>
    <name.id>R36</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I ask that further questions be placed on the <inline font-style="italic">Notice Paper</inline>. And can I give a shout out to Andrew, Craig, Harry and Adam, proud members of the Australian Workers Union, who I met with earlier this morning. Good on you. Thanks for coming and having a chat.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONDOLENCES</title>
        <page.no>63</page.no>
        <type>CONDOLENCES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Ross, Justice Iain AO</title>
          <page.no>63</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:18</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Some members will be aware that just before we started question time today, Justice Iain Ross, the president of the Fair Work Commission, who served in that role for more than 10 years, gave notice of his resignation to the Governor-General, which will be effective on midnight Friday 18 November. I had a chance just before question time to talk to Justice Ross and reflect on his service to governments from both sides of politics over that decade and his extraordinary work in the service of the Fair Work Commission.</para>
<para>In only recent years alone, he was responsible for the changes to horticultural law to remove some of those piecework provisions where people were being paid wages as low as $4 a day. He laid the groundwork for what became this parliament's legislation on family and domestic violence leave. He was responsible for overseeing the 5.2 per cent pay increase and the 15 per cent increase in aged care that've been spoken about today. He also, only last Friday, released a statement on the gender undervaluation in feminised industries, with the gender pay gap still sitting at 14 per cent.</para>
<para>He has served the role in the Fair Work Commission for 10 years with absolute integrity and solid service. Working people in Australia are better off as a result of his service.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Personal Explanation</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to make a personal explanation.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Do you claim to have been misrepresented?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Most grievously, Mr Speaker.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You may proceed.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A headline in today's <inline font-style="italic">Australian</inline> says, 'Ex-Nationals appointee John McVeigh evicted from Murray-Darling rivers panel chair.' Briefly, for context, the article says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Labor has dropped former Nationals MP John McVeigh as the head of an expert Murray-Darling rivers panel …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">…   …   …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">… as chair of the Modernising Murray River Systems Review Panel …</para></quote>
<para>There are two points. The first one is that Dr—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! I call the Leader of the House on a point of order.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Burke</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>On personal explanations, the standing order that the honourable member is using is a really specific standing order where you have to show where you have been personally misrepresented. If the misrepresentation is not personal and not established at the outset, members have normally not been allowed to proceed.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPE</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will allow the member to proceed and ask him to come immediately to where he has been misrepresented.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The story also claims, wrongly, 'by the Minister for Water', and that this is 'typical of the Nationals' approach to the basin'. I make two points. The story also did not include—</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The Leader of the House will resume his seat. Member for Hinkler, I will give you one more chance to immediately demonstrate where you have been misrepresented, not the Nationals, not anyone else—you. You have the call.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The point that was made was that I had incorrectly appointed Dr McVeigh, that his qualifications were not included. They include, for example, that he has a bachelor in business; a masters in business administration; and a PhD including being in, would you believe, sustainable water use in Australian irrigated agriculture, which is directly relevant to the appointment.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PARTY OFFICE HOLDERS</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>PARTY OFFICE HOLDERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Greens</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Very briefly, I advise the House that the member for Brisbane has been elected the Greens whip in the House.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>DOCUMENTS</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>DOCUMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the <inline font-style="italic">Votes and Proceedings</inline>.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Presentation</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
    <electorate></electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I present the 2022 presiding officers' statement regarding the condition of Parliament House.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>COMMITTEES</title>
        <page.no>64</page.no>
        <type>COMMITTEES</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Joint Select Committee on Fair Work Amendment Legislation</title>
          <page.no>64</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Appointment</title>
            <page.no>64</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I seek leave to move the following motion:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) a Joint Select Committee on Fair Work Amendment Legislation be established to inquire into and report on the provisions of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) the committee consist of 12 members, being two from the House of Representatives and two from the Senate nominated by the Prime Minister, two from the House of Representatives and two from the Senate nominated by the Leader of the Opposition, and two from the House of Representatives and two from the Senate to be nominated by any minority group or independent Member or Senator;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) every nomination of a member of the committee be notified in writing to the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) in the event that a house is not sitting and is not expected to meet for at least two weeks, the relevant whip in the House of Representatives, the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, minority groups or independent Senators may nominate any appointment or discharge of a member of a committee in writing to the relevant Presiding Officer. The change in membership shall take effect from the time the Presiding Officer received the written nomination. At the next sitting, the Presiding Officer shall report the change to the relevant house and the house shall resolve that membership of the committee;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(5) the persons appointed for the time being to serve on the committee shall constitute the committee notwithstanding any failure by the Senate or the House of Representatives to appoint the full number of Senators or Members referred to in this resolution;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(6) members of the committee hold office as a joint select committee until presentation of the committee's report;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(7) the committee elect a chair and deputy chair;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(8) in the event of an equally divided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(9) four members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include at least one Government member of either house and one non-Government member of either house;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(10) the committee have power to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) call for witnesses to attend and for documents to be produced;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) conduct proceedings at any place it sees fit;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) sit in public or in private; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(11) the committee report on or before the last sitting day in February 2023;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(12) the bill not proceed past its second reading until the committee has reported; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(13) the provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing and sessional orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing and sessional orders.</para></quote>
<para>Leave not granted.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business from moving the following motion:</para></quote>
<para>That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Manager of Opposition Business from moving the following motion immediately—</para>
<para>That:</para>
<para>(1) a Joint Select Committee on Fair Work Amendment Leg islation be established to inquire into and report on the provisions of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022;</para>
<para>(2) the committee consist of 12 members, being two from the House of Representatives and two from the Senate no minated by the Prime Minister, two from the House of Representatives and two from the Senate nominated by the Leader of the Opposition, and two from the House of Representatives and two from the Senate to be nominated by any minority group or independent M ember or Senator;</para>
<para>(3) every nomination of a member of the committee be notified in writing to the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives;</para>
<para>(4) in the event that a house is not sitting and is not expected to meet for at least two weeks, the relevant whip in the House of Representatives, the Leader of the Government in the Senate, the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, minority groups or independent Senators may nominate any appointment or discharge of a member of a committ ee in writing to the relevant Presiding Officer. The change in membership shall take effect from the time the Presiding Officer received the written nomination. At the next sitting, the Presiding Officer shall report the change to the relevant house and th e house shall resolve that membership of the committee;</para>
<para>(5) the persons appointed for the time being to serve on the committee shall constitute the committee notwithstanding any failure by the Senate or the House of Representatives to appoint the full numb er of Senators or Members referred to in this resolution;</para>
<para>(6) members of the committee hold office as a joint select committee until presentation of the committee's report;</para>
<para>(7) the committee elect a chair and deputy chair;</para>
<para>(8) in the event of an equally di vided vote, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote;</para>
<para>(9) four members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include at least one Government member of either house and one non-Government member of either house;</para>
<para>(10) the committee have power to:</para>
<para>(a) call for witnesses to attend and for documents to be produced;</para>
<para>(b) conduct proceedings at any place it sees fit;</para>
<para>(c) sit in public or in private; and</para>
<para>(d) adjo urn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives;</para>
<para>(11) the committee report on or before the last sitting day in February 2023;</para>
<para>(12) the bill not proceed past its second reading until the committee has reported; and</para>
<para>(13) the provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing and sessional orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing and sessional orders.</para>
<para>Standing orders must be suspended so that the House can agree on mechanisms to allow proper scrutiny of and informed debate on Labor's industrial relations bill, the so-called 'Fair Work, Fair Pay' bill in the House of Representatives. This is urgent, because it is clear that the Albanese Labor government is planning to use its numbers to ram this bill through the House of Representative. This is not good process. This is a 249-page bill and it needs proper scrutiny and examination.</para>
<para>That is why this motion would establish a joint select committee to examine the provisions of this bill and to report back by the last sitting day in February 2023. The model of establishing a joint select committee is exactly what the government did with its National Anti-Corruption Commission Bill, and the drafting of this motion draws substantially on the drafting of the motion moved by the Attorney-General to establish the joint select committee into the National Anti-Corruption Commission.</para>
<para>The matter is urgent because the government has been taking precisely the opposite approach to that which is required in relation to this lengthy and detailed bill, which would introduce the most radical changes in industrial relations in Australia for decades. This is absolutely the kind of bill that deserves the proper and careful scrutiny of the House of Representatives, but we have seen precisely the opposite approach from this government in seeking to ram this bill through the House as quickly as possible and using their numbers to do so.</para>
<para>The joint select committee which this motion would establish is designed to correct some of the flaws in the government's approach by allowing a more proper and thorough process of investigation into this bill. There is little doubt that this is what the Australian community would expect of their parliament in considering this important legislation. There is little doubt that every electorate which has elected a member to this place expects that member to be able to do his or her job in scrutinising and overseeing legislation which is before this House.</para>
<para>It is not a sufficient answer to that proposition to say, 'There's no need to worry because there will be a Senate committee.' There are two houses of this parliament, and it is important that this matter be properly and thoroughly considered by both houses. That's a principle that was acknowledged by the government in establishing the Joint Select Committee on National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation, because there is representation from both houses on that joint select committee, and it's a principle which the opposition believes should underpin the establishment of this joint select committee.</para>
<para>The fact is that many concerns have been raised across the community about what the government's bill will mean for businesses, for workers and for all Australians. Many concerns have, rightly, been raised about increased strike action, increased industrial action, the impact on small business and many other considerations. Australians deserve to have those concerns heard, examined, ventilated and scrutinised, and for this House to be able to reach an informed position on this bill. By contrast, the deeply deficient process which the government is pursuing is that this 249-page bill was introduced in the previous setting week—only a few short days ago—and we now understand that the government intends to ram it through this chamber with very little time for appropriate consideration, appropriate examination and appropriately putting forward and debating amendments.</para>
<para>Let's be clear. Let's understand the urgency. Let's understand why standing orders need to be suspended. This is radical industrial relations legislation. This is the government jumping to the tune of the union bosses. It will mean more strikes. It will mean unions coming into small businesses when they have not been there before. It is a recipe for chaos in our economy. It means that the militant CFMMEU will be able to ride roughshod over building sites around the country, because this legislation abolishes the Australian Building and Construction Commission, which has been an important check on some of the worst excesses of the particular thuggish organisation. It means a return to the pattern bargaining that bedevilled Australian economy in the strike-ridden 1970s. The reason it is urgent that this matter be considered now, and vital that standing orders be suspended so that the House of Representatives can consider and vote on the establishment of a joint select committee, is that the policy matters here are weighty, the process that has been proposed for consideration is deeply inadequate, and we simply need to do better.</para>
<para>The key figures in the government—the Prime Minister, for example—talked big when in opposition about accountability and the need for a full and proper debate. The Prime Minister told Australians that he'd changed his spots—he was no longer a tough career politician. We were going to have new, kinder and gentler politics. He said he wanted to 'change the way we do politics in Australia'. Despite those promises, what we saw was that at the very first opportunity upon coming to government the Albanese Labor government fundamentally changed the way that procedures work in this House of Representatives, giving themselves power to impose gags and to shut down debate simply on the say-so of a minister, without any need for the matter to be voted upon at all. Sadly, gagging bills has become a pattern of behaviour from this government.</para>
<para>The facts are very clear as to why this matter is urgent and why standing orders need to be suspended. The Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022 is 249 pages. It is a very complex and detailed bill, and upon any view it will have material consequences for industrial relations in Australia and for the operation of our economy and our society. That is why this motion seeks to have standing orders suspended so that a motion can be put to establish a joint select committee, in order that the issues connected to this bill can be subject—as they should be—to the fullest weight of parliamentary scrutiny. It has been drafted having regard to the approach the government took in relation to the National Anti-Corruption Commission and in relation to other precedents in the way that joint select committees work. This is good process. It's being proposed to correct a clear weakness in process, and so I commend what we are proposing to the House and I commend the motion to the House.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr</name>
    <name.id>218019</name.id>
    <electorate>Page</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>HOGAN (—) (): I stand to second the motion. This is an important suspension and a very important motion to refer this bill to a joint select committee. What the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022is about—let's make no mistake about this—is the Labour Party paying their union piper. This is about them paying back the money that the union movement has paid to the Labor Party, the fact that the union movement funds Labor Party members into their positions. This is about paying the piper. We know that the unions control the factions of the Labor Party, we know that the unions control preselections of everyone within the Labor Party, so the unions now control the Labor government. That's the basic fact of what we're talking about.</para>
<para>I don't have a problem with unions. I think unions play a very important role in our economy and the workforce. But unions represent 14 per cent of the workforce. Over there, everyone is basically part of the union movement, or they won't get their job, so this new government is not reflective of the workforce in Australia just because they are looking through the prism of how 14 per cent of the workforce operate. What this legislation is about is they're paying their puppetmasters. This legislation is one of the first pieces of legislation they moved. As the Manager of Opposition Business said, this is a piece of priority legislation they want to get through because they have to pay the puppetmasters. They are paying the piper, and that's what this is about.</para>
<para>The disturbing thing about this is that this is going to take us back to pre-Hawke and Keating days. Hawke and Keating weren't run by the union movement; they were standalone Labor operatives who knew that the unions occasionally had to be reined in. Keating wasn't taking his tune from the union movement. But with this legislation we're reversing some of the reforms that were implemented by the Hawke-Keating government. What does that mean? What don't they see? When you are only reflecting 14 per cent of the workforce, what no-one over on that side of the House understands—and we've said this many times in the past—is what it's like to run a small business. They have never run a small business. They've never been in private enterprise where they've had to go: 'You know what, I've got to pay someone else's salary. I have to work out how to run my balance sheet. How do I run the business to make sure that I can pay people back?' There might be one or two who claim they have, but I would like to see the proof for it.</para>
<para>That is why they do not see through a wider prism of how an economy and the workforce operate. They still have the mentality—it's almost like a 1950s mentality—that everything is one versus the other. They view it as Labor versus capital, but that's not how the world operates anymore. Any small business and any large business operator will tell you the most important asset they have, the most important people in their enterprise, are their staff, and that's how they treat them. The vast majority of employers treat their staff well and give them incentives to stay because they know they are the most important people they have. They know their business will only survive if they have good staff. But these guys and these ladies don't understand that, thinking it's all about labour versus capital. The union movement always says, 'They're the bad ones, and we're the good people.' That is how this legislation is drafted, so this is going to give us a big power imbalance.</para>
<para>As the Manager for Opposition Business said, it means we're going to get more militancy in workplaces. We're going to have more strikes, and what does that mean? Unfortunately, the worst affect of this legislation will be on the workers. What will happen is that it will make us uncompetitive, it will make us unproductive. As a community we saw that Keating and Hawke led this charge with workplace relations reform because they saw that we needed to become more competitive and more productive as a country that is operating within a global economy. We have to compete with everyone else, and this legislation unfortunately takes us back to the seventies. But no surprises because we know what this is about: they are paying the puppetmaster.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
    <electorate>Watson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It won't surprise people to know that the government is opposing the resolution in front of us, but I think that, given the comments just made, it's important to explain why in the view of the government we are pressing the time lines on this. It's important given that this has been raised, and I pay respect to the Manager for Opposition Business; this is absolutely an appropriate use of a suspension. This is not just to blow up the parliament. It's an argument about delay that those opposite have put publicly and are now putting within the parliament.</para>
<para>A few things were said, so I want to explain why the government does have a timetable where we want to get this in front of the Senate when the Senate returns. To be able to do that means it going through the House this week. This resolution, if carried, obviously means it wouldn't go through the House this week and, in fact, couldn't go through the House at all this year. The contributions just made had a few references to the reforms of the Hawke and Keating years. When those opposite talk about those years, they often only talk about the beginning of that time, with the accord where you effectively had the trade-off of wages in return for the social wage. What those opposite rarely talk about—it certainly didn't come up in their contributions—was what happened in the latter part of that period in terms of enterprise bargaining, because it was at that moment that you had a way for wages to move forward and productivity to move forward. The trade-off concept of wages versus social wage no longer had to occur, and you had a serious shift to get wages moving in enterprise agreement. The 14 per cent figure that they refer to is not the 14 per cent figure that I'm really mindful of. The 14 per cent figure that I'm really mindful of is the percentage of the workforce that is on enterprise agreements that are currently in date. That is a huge part of the story of low wage growth over the last 10 years.</para>
<para>There have been attempts, and those opposite have said they introduced legislation to try to get agreements moving, and that's true; in the omnibus bill they did do something that would have potentially caused more agreements. But their way of getting more agreements was to suspend for two years the better-off-overall test. Their way of getting more agreements was to keep the productivity dividend and get rid of the wages part of the equation, allowing wages to go backwards in order to get more agreements. That was never a sensible way, and it simply would have made of the problem that Australians face right now so much worse if the one way of getting wages above awards became a pathway for wages in fact to be below award levels. That was their approach to getting more agreements.</para>
<para>Our approach to getting more agreements is to do a couple of things that make a fundamental difference. The first is to reform how the better-off-overall test works. That's in this bill. Business has been calling for this for a long time. Had this been the only thing the government had put in the omnibus bill when that came through last time, they would have had legislation that could have been supported, because they would have had legislation that in no way drove wages down. But, effectively, what is in this bill in terms of the rejigging of the better-off-overall test is a way of making sure that, if someone is found to fall below it, the commission has the power to fix it for that individual rather than blow up the whole agreement. The reality that you could end up with a whole agreement being blown up has been a key reason why a whole lot of employers have said, 'This system is too complex' and have walked away from it. As they've walked away from it, the productivity benefits haven't been made available for them, and, at the same time that the productivity benefits haven't been made available, the wage rises haven't happened either.</para>
<para>It was amusing, as someone from a small-business family who has run his own small business, being told as I sat there that nobody on this side has run their own business. I was sitting there having run my own business and sitting beside someone who has run his own business. But I will tell you one thing I will never forget that a manager at Kmart told me at one point. He was going through the Kmart agreement and saying to me how good it was to have an agreement that took out all the rubbish in the award that was irrelevant to their workplace and was just a document where every paragraph was relevant. I remember hearing that conversation and thinking that, for the businesses I used to run—and certainly for the business my dad used to run—we never had a chance that simplicity, because we never had an HR department and we never had a chance of an HR department and the only way you would have a pathway to that simplicity is if similar businesses could just hire the one consultant and bargain together. It's the only chance you would ever have of getting a document that will work in those ways.</para>
<para>Honourable members interjecting—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I hear those opposite. I hear the shadow Treasurer. It's amusing that he clearly hasn't looked at any of the businesses that have called for this. He hasn't looked at the Victorian childcare centres that have called for exactly this. He hasn't looked at the sheet-metal operators who have called for exactly this. He hasn't looked at the cleaning companies. They've tried to get an agreement, and what has then happened is that, when you get an agreement in place, some new operator comes in and completely undercuts. The good employer, who wants to compete on grounds like better equipment, smarter operations and quality of service, finds themselves straightaway losing their contracts because they're competing on the grounds of a race to the bottom on wages.</para>
<para>There are plenty of good employers who would like to be able to have the certainty of delivering the sort of pay they know in their current business operations they can offer without being undercut in a race to the bottom on wages. As long as you don't open up multi-employer bargaining, you will always have that problem. So—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>And he's there again: 'It's going to force it up.' Yes, wages will go up. And those opposite, having spent 10 years determined to keep wages down are now saying, 'Well, can't we keep wages down for a couple more months?' Can I tell you, in terms of dealing with wages—</para>
</continue>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The shadow treasurer is saying, 'I said "prices".' Yet the quotation says: 'It pushes up wages. It pushes up wages.'</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Taylor</name>
    <name.id>231027</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>You missed the next bit: the prices, Burkey, prices.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Hume will cease interjecting.</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURKE</name>
    <name.id>DYW</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Those opposite want to continue. Having had 10 years of deliberately keeping wages down, they are now saying ,'Can't we have a few more months?' And what would happen if it went through to January? They would have another reason: 'Can't this bit be delayed a bit further? Can't we keep delaying it?' That has been the experience of workers. Let me tell you: if inflation is now running at 7.3 and is projected to get to eight per cent, I can't think of a time, certainly in my working life, where delay would have a greater impact on households around Australia.</para>
<para>I'll leave it there because I did see members of the crossbench jumping up when I jumped up and I don't want to use up all the time, but allow me to simply say that the government is determined to get wages moving. We are in the hands of the Senate as to when this legislation gets through. I want to make sure that we have the legislation in front of them as soon as the Senate returns. We will continue to push for wages to get moving because households that are feeling the pinch of higher prices need to see improvements in wages after 10 years of them being held back.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to say that I support this motion because I think, more than any other piece of legislation this year, we have in front of us an incredibly complex piece of legislation and we need to follow process. Whether you agree with the legislation or disagree with the legislation, this place is supposed to be the place in Australia where we look line by line, detail by detail, and we give fair consideration to changing the laws of Australia. This goes to transparency, and it goes to process. The thing is—and I think this is to be said of both sides of this House, for generations—when we've rushed things through in this place, we've made mistakes. It doesn't matter who is in government: it happens.</para>
<para>This bill was introduced on the last sitting day that we had, and now today we're going to be debating this legislation. In my hand I have the explanatory memorandum, which comprises more than 250 pages. The bill is the same again. I think it's incredibly unreasonable for us not to have proper debate and proper scrutiny of an incredibly complex piece of legislation. There are unintended consequences when bills are rushed through, and that is that we make mistakes—and those mistakes are borne by the people of Australia, whether they be businesses or whether they be employees. So I would ask the government to consider this. Let us have an inquiry. An injury fleshes out the issues.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order. The time for the debate has concluded. The question is that the suspension moved by the Manager of Opposition Business be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [15:54]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>77</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, A. N.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chalmers, J. E.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Gosling, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Katter, R. C.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Khalil, P.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>63</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, R. E.</name>
                  <name>Buchholz, S.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Coleman, D. B.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Dutton, P. C.</name>
                  <name>Entsch, W. G.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Gillespie, D. A.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hastie, A. W.</name>
                  <name>Hawke, A. G.</name>
                  <name>Hogan, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Joyce, B. T. G.</name>
                  <name>Landry, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Littleproud, D.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>McIntosh, M. I.</name>
                  <name>McKenzie, Z. A.</name>
                  <name>Morrison, S. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, L. S.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pike, H. J.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Price, M. L.</name>
                  <name>Ramsey, R. E. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Robert, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Thompson, P.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Tudge, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Vasta, R. X.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Wallace, A. B.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Webster, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                  <name>Wood, J. P.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to, with an absolute majority. </p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division></subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>BILLS</title>
        <page.no>71</page.no>
        <type>BILLS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022</title>
          <page.no>71</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r6916" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Consideration in Detail</title>
            <page.no>71</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>15:58</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the amendments to the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation (Respect at Work) Bill 2022, circulated by the member for Wentworth. While there is much to commend, the scope of the 'Respect at Work' bill does not extend the same protections to everyone who is protected under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 and that's why I support this amendment—because everyone deserves to be treated with dignity and respect at work.</para>
<para>The attribute of sex only is too narrow. In its submission to the Senate inquiry, Equality Australia argued that the new protections regarding hostile work environments and the positive duty to eliminate discrimination should apply to all protected attributes under the Sex Discrimination Act, including sexual orientation, gender identity and intersex status. This would ensure consistency and coherence in federal discrimination law, and ensure that all protections in the Sex Discrimination Act apply equally to people regardless of their gender, sexual orientation or sex characteristics. As the Prime Minister said in this chamber today, statistics show that LGBTIQA+ people experience high rates of discrimination, including harassment and sexual harassment. In the largest study of its kind, Private Lives 3 documented the experiences of almost 7,000 LGBTIQ+ plus people living in Australia. Around one in four said they had experienced harassment in the past 12 months because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Young transgender people are one of the most vulnerable groups in our society, experiencing discrimination, bullying, harassment, often a lack of family acceptance, and barriers to medical care.</para>
<para>Life can be challenging enough for these groups. It should not be that way in the workplace too. No-one should feel unsafe or uncomfortable in their place of work, and this reform, therefore, shouldn't stop with the Sex Discrimination Act. There's also a place for a positive duty to eliminate discrimination in all federal discrimination laws: the Racial Discrimination Act 1975, the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and the Age Discrimination Act 2004. I urge the government to make a comprehension review of its federal discrimination laws as a matter of priority, and I commend this amendment to the House.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments moved by the member for Wentworth be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [16:05]<br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)</p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>69</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Albanese, A. N.</name>
                  <name>Aly, A.</name>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Bell, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Broadbent, R. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Butler, M. C.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Fletcher, P. W.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>King, C. F.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Ley, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marles, R. D.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McBride, E. M.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Brien, E. L.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>O'Neil, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Phillips, F. E.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Taylor, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>15</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move amendments (1) to (3), as circulated in my name, together:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 5, item 3, page 26 (line 12) to page 27 (line 13), omit section 46PSA, substitute:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block"> 46PSA Costs</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) In proceedings under this Division against a respondent to a terminated complaint, an applicant in the proceedings may be ordered by the court to pay costs incurred by another party to the proceedings only in accordance with subsection (3).</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) The court may not make an award of costs against an applicant who conducts the proceedings in a reasonable manner, in respect of any costs which relate to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the complaint; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) any appeal in respect of the complaint.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) The applicant may be ordered to pay:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) all, or part of, the costs referred to in subsection (2) if the court is satisfied that the applicant instituted the proceedings vexatiously or without reasonable cause; or</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) so much of another party's costs that the court is satisfied were incurred as a result of conduct by the applicant in the course of the proceedings which the court determines to be unreasonable.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) Schedule 5, item 6, page 27 (lines 24 and 25), omit "if the Court considers that there are circumstances that justify it in doing so", substitute "in certain circumstances".</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) Schedule 5, item 9, page 28 (lines 8 and 9), omit "if the Court considers that there are circumstances that justify it in doing so", substitute "in certain circumstances".</para></quote>
<para>I'm grateful for the opportunity to submit these proposed amendments to the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022. The landmark Jenkins report found that workplace sexual harassment is prevalent and pervasive. It occurs in every industry, in every location and at every level in Australian workplaces. This bill is an important and historic landmark on our path to a fairer, more equitable and safer workplace for all Australians.</para>
<para>I applaud the Albanese government for committing to preventing and addressing the consequences of workplace sexual harassment and other forms of discrimination. I also welcome the Attorney-General's comments this morning—that this is just the beginning of a conversation on these matters—and I agree with him that reasonable minds may well differ on their execution. I remain of the belief, however, that the issue of costs provision, as managed in this bill, is problematic, and it's this which is addressed by the proposed amendments.</para>
<para>Recommendation 25 of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report clearly articulates the need to ensure that fear of adverse costs orders does not create a barrier to victims-survivors of workplace sexual harassment seeking access to justice. In passing this important legislation, we have to make it easier for victims of workplace sexual harassment to speak out and to receive justice. We must ensure that employers understand their responsibility to protect their workplace and their workforce, and the ramifications of not doing so. The risk of adverse costs orders is clearly a disincentive to applicants considering pursuing sexual harassment matters in the Federal Court.</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report proposed that costs might be ordered against the applicant only where the court was satisfied that the party instituted the proceedings vexatiously or without cause. That model has not been adopted in this bill. Instead, this bill proposes a cost-neutrality approach in which litigants bear their own costs unless the court orders otherwise. The bill does set out various factors that the court must have regard to in making costs orders. Superficially, the cost-neutral arrangement represents an improvement on the status quo. In effect, however, its design and the uncertainty around its operation will serve to undermine access to justice by limiting the ability of applicants to secure legal representation. Taking a cost-neutrality approach to a relationship characterised by systemic inequality only serves to entrench that inequality.</para>
<para>The amendment I have proposed offers an alternative: an equal-access approach. Under this proposal, each party will bear its own costs, except when the applicant is unsuccessful—that is, when the court has found that the respondent has engaged in discriminatory conduct, in which case the respondent will be liable to pay the applicant's costs, as they should. You should not be excused from bearing costs when you have broken the law. People and organisations found to have engaged in discrimination or harassment in breach of the law should have to pay the legal costs of the applicant. This will act as an incentive to change workplace cultures that permit discriminatory treatment. This should apply not only to sex discrimination cases but also to cases or instances of discrimination on the basis of race, age or physical capacity.</para>
<para>As the government knows, an equal-access model has already been adopted domestically for whistleblowers. In introducing this change to the usual costs rule, the parliament recognised that, at that time:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Legal costs can be prohibitive to any person seeking compensation for damage, and the risk of being ordered to pay the costs of other parties to the proceedings may deter whistleblowers and other victims of victimisation from bringing the matter to court.</para></quote>
<para>This reform will increase access to justice. People who've experienced harassment and discrimination will be able to take their cases to court, and discriminatory behaviour will be appropriately penalised. There will be a flow-on impact to workplace culture. Each of the seven recommendations being implemented through this bill is important and long overdue. Combined, they will fundamentally change how acceptance and respect are perceived in our workplace. But I urge the government to accept this proposed amendment to improve the path to representation in the Federal Court.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BANDT</name>
    <name.id>M3C</name.id>
    <electorate>Melbourne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Just briefly, the Greens support this amendment to the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022, and I thank the member for Kooyong for moving it. The Greens first raised this issue in the report of the Senate inquiry into this bill. The cost provision is important because this bill now gives people a number of very important rights—rights that we support—and we welcome the passage of this bill. But to have those rights, including the right to be in a workplace free from discrimination and harassment, you must be able to enforce them.</para>
<para>Now, the barriers in the way of people enforcing the rights that they have under this bill will often be financial. There are two things that need to be done to remove that barrier. One is to say that you are not going to be exposed to having to pay your employer's costs if you bring a case in good faith and you lose. But the second, in those instances where you bring a case and you're successful, is to have the capacity to have some of the costs recovered. What is very, very clear from the evidence that was submitted to the Senate inquiry during the course of this bill is that in many instances it is only the capacity for someone to recover some of those costs and not to have to bear them out of their own pocket—it's their own costs I'm talking about—that means that people can seek justice and can seek that the law be enforced.</para>
<para>The provision that is being put forward is one that says: if you come and bring an action, you will know that, unless you're acting in bad faith or vexatiously, you are not going to be out of pocket and that if you succeed because you've demonstrated that the employer has broken the law—perhaps by providing an unsafe workplace or perhaps by allowing discrimination to happen against you—then you're going to get your costs, or at least a substantial part of them, met. The organisations who have come and given evidence and have signed the open letter today have all made the point very, very clearly that this will often be the only way we will be able to enforce the law.</para>
<para>I listened carefully to the Attorney-General's contribution during the summing up debate and I was pleased to hear—if I understood it correctly—that this is something that the government will be giving further consideration to. Because this is an important bill, and one that we welcome, and as the Greens flagged in our Senate report, this must be resolved, moved to amend, in the Senate when the bill comes before the Senate—the rights that are granted to people to be in a workplace free from sexual harassment and discrimination have to be rights that can be enforced. This cost provision is modelled on whistleblower legislation, where similar provisions apply. In many instances it's going to be women who are blowing the whistle on sexual harassment in their workplace, and they have the right not only to be protected from adverse cost orders but to know that if it's demonstrated that the employer has done the wrong thing then their costs are going to be met, all or in part.</para>
<para>I thank the Attorney-General for saying during the summing up debate that this is something which is going to be considered as this bill works its way through the Senate. A change to this provision, whether it's along the lines of that proposed by the member for Kooyong or along the lines of what the Greens have proposed in the Senate or along other lines, will actually expand access to justice and ensure that the new rights that are gratefully received in this bill will be able to be enforced.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As I have said in the summing up on the bill, addressing this question of cost: the cost model in this bill does seek to strike a balance when it comes to discrimination matters generally, not merely sexual harassment matters. I'm pleased that the member for Kooyong is prepared to agree that reasonable minds may differ on whether or not the bill strikes the appropriate balance for costs for all discrimination matters.</para>
<para>It is really important to note that the model in the bill, which follows the recommendations of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report, includes a discretion for courts to award costs in the interests of justice. Without wishing to predict the development of jurisprudence in this area, I think that the interests of justice in a particular case, when considered by a court in a sexual harassment matter in an employment context—where, as the member for Kooyong said, it is very likely that in most cases there will be a vast asymmetry of power and economic advantage—and in circumstances where we have a bill which is going to create legislation that directs the court to consider the financial circumstances of each of the parties, whether the subject matter of the proceedings involves an issue of public importance and some other relevant considerations, are where we are likely to see cost orders. I do think that's a very key point.</para>
<para>As honourable members have noted in speaking on this amendment, I have said that this is just the start, in the earliest months of this government, a new government, of a conversation about human rights and antidiscrimination in this country. It's a conversation I look forward to continuing to have with all members of this parliament and, indeed, with the whole Australian community. But at this time the government will not be supporting this amendment.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [16:27] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>83</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Andrews, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Bowen, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Boyce, C. E.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Charlton, A. H. G.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Husic, E. N.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>Kearney, G. M.</name>
                  <name>Keogh, M. J.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Lawrence, T. N.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Leigh, A. K.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Marino, N. B.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>O'Connor, B. P. J.</name>
                  <name>Pasin, A.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Perrett, G. D.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Rae, S. T.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Shorten, W. R.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z.</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Vamvakinou, M.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Ware, J. L.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Wells, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, J. H.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                  <name>Young, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Zappia, A.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>9</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are two components to the amendment that I have circulated. It's a simple amendment to the drafting of the objects of the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill 2022. What's important in the first part of this amendment is that it's consistent with recommendation 16a of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report. This amendment omits the 'so far as practicable' from the objects. This is necessary because the current wording introduces a lower standard than is proposed in recommendation 16 of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@</inline><inline font-style="italic">Work</inline> report. It's inconsistent with several other objects contained in section 3 of the Sex Discrimination Act, which sets a higher standard. It may give rise to the implication that rights codified in the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women will only be protected domestically to the extent that it is practicable to do so.</para>
<para>In relation to the second part of the amendment, it is about changing the language used. The objects as drafted by the government in the bill refer to men and women specifically. We need to start moving to gender neutral language. Legislation in this place needs to start embracing the future and younger generations, who are not defined by gender language. In line with the Commonwealth Latimer House principles, gender neutral language should be used in the drafting and use of legislation.</para>
<para>I've heard the Attorney-General say in this place, 'This is changes for later,' and, 'We're just going to stick to exactly the wording of the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report.' But the reality is it is incumbent on all of us, in this place, to think about the population that we are going to bind by this legislation. We need to make sure people identify, see themselves, in this legislation, and by restraining the wording, even just in the objects of the act, you are saying that you are limiting it to just those two categorisations.</para>
<para>The reality, in this day and age, in 2022, is that this does not represent everyone. Many people in our communities do not identify in that way. So by limiting the language that way you are limiting the effect of this legislation, which is good. It is very good that we're implementing <inline font-style="italic">R</inline><inline font-style="italic">espect</inline><inline font-style="italic">@W</inline><inline font-style="italic">ork</inline>, that we're making sure sexual harassment and discrimination is limited. But gender neutral language is a way of showing, especially to young people, that everyone in this place is future focused, recognises that times are changing, and it is important that legislation does so as well. It should reflect and respond to community expectations.</para>
<para>We know that gender neutral language is important and there's a strong case for it. The Australian Human Rights Commission national survey found that several harms that the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report are seeking to address are incredibly acute for people who identify as LGBTQIA+. In fact, some one in four out of 7,000 interviewed reported harassment in their workplace. If the goal of this legislation is to limit this, the language in the legislation should be inclusive not exclusive. That is what this amendment simply seeks to do.</para>
<para>This is aligned with the recommendations and submission of the Law Council of Australia, and it's consistent with the conclusion of the final report of the inquiry into this bill. The report on the inquiry into this bill concluded that, with respect to the objects clause, the committee notes that there are different and strongly held views that the construction of paragraph 3(e) of the Sex Discrimination Act. The committee acknowledges the importance of gender inclusive language throughout Australia's antidiscrimination law and urges the Australian government to give more thought to the matter.</para>
<para>I'd urge the Attorney-General and the government to consider changing the language of the objects and consider this amendment. It is a simple amendment. This is not opening up a floodgate or changing anything drastic from where the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> recommendations go, but it is a strong signal to young people, to people of LGBTQI or people that are non-binary, that don't identify with man or woman, that they are also meant to be protected and included in this legislation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I acknowledge the remarks of the member for Warringah but I need to say that the government is focused on ensuring alignment with the recommendations in the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report and the existing structure of the Sex Discrimination Act. That was our election commitment.</para>
<para>The drafting of the bill provisions is consistent with recommendation 16(a) in that it applies to substantive equality as between men and women. I can also say that the Sex Discrimination Act already contains an objects clause related to the elimination of discrimination on the other grounds of discrimination covered by the act. The member for Warringah's amendment is not consistent with the <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> recommendation and the government does not support it.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>53517</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The question is that the amendments moved by the honourable member for Warringah be disagreed to.</para>
<para> </para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<division>
            <division.header>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionPreamble">The House divided. [16:43] <br />(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick) </p>
              </body>
            </division.header>
            <division.data>
              <ayes>
                <num.votes>63</num.votes>
                <title>AYES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Ananda-Rajah, M.</name>
                  <name>Birrell, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Burke, A. S.</name>
                  <name>Burnell, M. P.</name>
                  <name>Burney, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Burns, J.</name>
                  <name>Byrnes, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Chesters, L. M.</name>
                  <name>Clare J. D.</name>
                  <name>Claydon, S. C.</name>
                  <name>Coker, E. A.</name>
                  <name>Collins, J. M.</name>
                  <name>Conaghan, P. J.</name>
                  <name>Coulton, M. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Dreyfus, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Elliot, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Fernando, C.</name>
                  <name>Freelander, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Garland, C. M. L.</name>
                  <name>Georganas, S.</name>
                  <name>Giles, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Goodenough, I. R. </name>
                  <name>Gorman, P.</name>
                  <name>Hill, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Jones, S. P.</name>
                  <name>King, M. M. H.</name>
                  <name>Laxale, J. A. A.</name>
                  <name>Le, D.</name>
                  <name>Leeser, J.</name>
                  <name>Lim, S. B. C.</name>
                  <name>Mascarenhas, Z. F. A.</name>
                  <name>McBain, K. L.</name>
                  <name>McCormack, M. F.</name>
                  <name>Miller-Frost, L. J.</name>
                  <name>Mitchell, R. G.</name>
                  <name>Mulino, D.</name>
                  <name>Neumann, S. K.</name>
                  <name>Payne, A. E.</name>
                  <name>Pearce, G. B.</name>
                  <name>Pitt, K. J.</name>
                  <name>Plibersek, T. J.</name>
                  <name>Reid, G. J.</name>
                  <name>Repacholi, D. P.</name>
                  <name>Rishworth, A. L.</name>
                  <name>Roberts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Rowland, M. A.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, J. C.</name>
                  <name>Scrymgour, M. R.</name>
                  <name>Sharkie, R. C. C.</name>
                  <name>Sitou, S.</name>
                  <name>Smith, D. P. B.</name>
                  <name>Stanley, A. M. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Stevens, J.</name>
                  <name>Sukkar, M. S.</name>
                  <name>Swanson, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Templeman, S. R.</name>
                  <name>Thistlethwaite, M. J.</name>
                  <name>Thwaites, K. L.</name>
                  <name>Violi, A. A.</name>
                  <name>Watts, T. G.</name>
                  <name>Willcox, A. J.</name>
                  <name>Wilson, R. J.</name>
                  <name>Wolahan, K.</name>
                </names>
              </ayes>
              <noes>
                <num.votes>14</num.votes>
                <title>NOES</title>
                <names>
                  <name>Archer, B. K.</name>
                  <name>Bandt, A. P.</name>
                  <name>Bates, S. J.</name>
                  <name>Chandler-Mather, M.</name>
                  <name>Chaney, K. E.</name>
                  <name>Daniel, Z.</name>
                  <name>Haines, H. M.</name>
                  <name>Ryan, M. M.</name>
                  <name>Scamps, S. A.</name>
                  <name>Spender, A. M.</name>
                  <name>Steggall, Z. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Tink, K. J. (Teller)</name>
                  <name>Watson-Brown, E.</name>
                  <name>Wilkie, A. D.</name>
                </names>
              </noes>
              <pairs>
                <num.votes>0</num.votes>
                <title>PAIRS</title>
                <names />
              </pairs>
            </division.data>
            <division.result>
              <body>
                <p class="HPS-DivisionFooter">Question agreed to.</p>
              </body>
            </division.result>
          </division><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">(1) Schedule 2, item 16, page 11 (after line 4), at the end of Division 4A, add:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">35AA Performance of functions relating to positive duty in relation to sex discrimination</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">In performing its functions under section 35A, the Commission must have regard to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the need for guidelines and other materials to be available in multiple languages; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) the cultural diversity of Australian workplaces.</para></quote>
<para>I commend the government for keeping to their promise to implement all the Sex Discrimination Commissioner's recommendations for making workplaces safe for all employees, regardless of sex. None of us should face discrimination for any reason at any time, but more so in our workplace, be it in big corporations, small business or government agencies. Creating a safe and respectful workplace is key to a productive and inclusive workforce. If people feel safe, respected and heard, they can perform to the best of their abilities.</para>
<para>That said, if employers can't easily fulfil the obligations that the proposed positive duty imposes, then an undue administrative red tape is imposed, particularly on small businesses with culturally and linguistically diverse owners and employees. Employers are already subject to significant obligations to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace. The opposition mentioned section 106 of the Sex Discrimination Act which makes employers liable for the actions of their employee or agent.</para>
<para>I would now ask the House to specifically consider the challenges that culturally and linguistically diverse Australians face on either side of this issue. The report noted that, while sex discrimination was increasing, reporting was not. The explanation given for this was a lack of faith in the reporting system. I would argue that those who speak English as a second language also face difficulties in reporting this issue effectively. It is undoubtedly a daunting task for these groups of people in our workforce to share their stories. For this reason, greater clarity is required.</para>
<para>In a Senate committee submission Diversity Council Australia raised some important points around intersectionality. Employees from culturally diverse backgrounds not only face increased prevalence of sexual harassment, but there is a compounding effect where there is also unconscious cultural biases at play. It is pervasive in some corporate structures, which I discovered in my previous life as an advocate for cultural diversity and leadership. We need to ensure that those from non-English-speaking backgrounds have the necessary resources and understanding of these new guidelines if you want them to engage with it and feel confident to pursue action despite cultural and linguistic barriers.</para>
<para>While it's important that government policy tries to create a widespread culture of respect, it is evident that some businesses have a greater capacity to comply than others. For example, large corporations have access to HR teams capable of putting together and ensuring compliance with a company-wide policy. This, however, is a large burden to place on a small business where the task may be left with one individual who also doubles as the accountant, the shift manager and other roles.</para>
<para>Small businesses, who are the backbone of our economy, are known to be a diverse sector, where two-thirds of small businesses come from a migrant background. Therefore the guidance materials from relevant bodies must be thorough and meet the needs of a wide cross-section of businesses who wish to ensure a safer workplace. While some businesses will have to be vigilant regarding internal issues, others, especially those in industries where employees are customer-facing, will have to create policy to reasonably diminish the chance of discrimination from customers.</para>
<para>I call on the government to ensure that they have given enough support to businesses to comply with this new legislation—in particular, small businesses run by culturally and linguistically diverse individuals in a variety of industries. In saying this, a worrying part of the legal process can be found in schedule 4, which makes it easier for unions and other representative groups to bring a grief claim to the Federal Court. I urge the government to reconsider this schedule as it allows large representative groups to initiate legal actions in their interests, rather than being solely about the protection of employees. We want to ensure those from non-English-speaking backgrounds have the support they need but won't be taken advantage of by other bodies with other vested interests. Litigants should be taken by the applicant with the support of the unions or representative bodies, not the other way around.</para>
<para>In summary, it isn't that my complaints line up with the aims of this bill, but rather with the lack of consideration for culturally diverse workplaces and their employees. I call on the government to ensure our culturally and linguistically diverse populations can access the reporting mechanisms as employees, and support small businesses through compliance hurdles. In its current form, these opaque guidelines are sparking debate amongst a group of individuals who largely speak English and have access to briefings and staff to help them understand the regulations. It's excluding those who lack these resources and who don't speak English as their first language, and unfairly expects them to reasonably comply.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:53</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Section 35A of the bill sets out the education, research, public engagement and compliance functions of the Australian Human Rights Commission in relation to the positive duty.</para>
<para>The amendment proposed by the member for Fowler would impose two requirements on the commission with respect to how it is to perform these functions. These include having regard to providing its guidance material on the positive duty in multiple languages and to the cultural diversity of Australian workplaces. The amendment is consistent with the existing approach of the commission when undertaking its education, research and public engagement functions.</para>
<para>The commission does publish its materials in multiple languages and engages with a diverse range of businesses, individuals and the community as a whole. In addition, the commission already has regard to the diversity of Australian workplaces when exercising its existing functions. The commission adopts an intersectional approach when exercising its functions, and I very much expect that the commission will continue to do so in relation to the positive duty. The government supports this amendment.</para>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill, as amended, agreed to.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Third Reading</title>
            <page.no>78</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr DREYFUS</name>
    <name.id>HWG</name.id>
    <electorate>Isaacs</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>by leave—I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this bill be now read a third time.</para></quote>
<para>Question agreed to.</para>
<para>Bill read a third time.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022</title>
          <page.no>78</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><subdebate.text>
          <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:wx="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
            <a href="r6924" type="Bill">
              <p class="HPS-SubDebate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
                <span class="HPS-SubDebate">Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022</span>
              </p>
            </a>
          </body>
        </subdebate.text><subdebate.2><subdebateinfo>
            <title>Second Reading</title>
            <page.no>78</page.no>
          </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr SUKKAR</name>
    <name.id>242515</name.id>
    <electorate>Deakin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the House for the opportunity to speak on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill, and I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes the severe workforce shortages across the country, record levels of job vacancies and almost a third of employing businesses having difficulty finding suitable staff;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes hiring and retaining employees remains a key challenge for small businesses; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to provide certainty by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a) increasing the work bonus from $300 to $600 a fortnight to incentivise eligible pensioners to work more hours without penalty from 1 July 2023; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b) reviewing this increase every twelve months to ensure these settings remain appropriate".</para></quote>
<para>By way of background, I want to congratulate the government for adopting measures that were first introduced to this House by the former coalition government, which, on 10 February, introduced the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill to incentivise recipients of the age pension, the disability support pension and certain veteran entitlements to undertake paid employment or to increase their paid employment.</para>
<para>Under the coalition's legislation, pensioners whose employment income as total income exceeded the income limit would have their age pension suspended for a period of up to two years, rather than what was the case at the time, which is that it was cancelled after 12 weeks. If at any time during the two-year period their income was at a level where they could return to the age pension—rather than it being cancelled after 12 weeks—they would benefit from an abridged reapplication process that only required them to update their circumstances, including their income and asset information, with Services Australia. The former coalition government bill also allowed for working age-pensioners, disability support pensioners and certain veterans' entitlement recipients and their partners to retain their pensioner concession card for up to two years after payment ceased.</para>
<para>As is known to the House, the bill didn't progress due to the election. But not long after the election, in an attempt to encourage the government to actually take these workforce shortages seriously and move quickly, which, sadly, they have not done, the coalition announced that a future coalition government would support older Australians who choose to work more, by doubling the amount of income that age pensioners and veterans service pensioners can earn without reducing pension payments. It was quite a bold thing to do in the immediate aftermath of entering opposition, but it was very clear to us at that time that the government was not acting with any sense of urgency in an area that we had seen workforce shortages exacerbated and the government on a go-slow.</para>
<para>This announcement, through which we made a gesture of goodwill to the government, giving them an idea that they could adopt—as, to their credit, they've adopted many other good ideas and measures that were put in place by the former government, would enable pensioners and of course relevant veterans entitlement recipients to earn up to $600 a fortnight and still receive the maximum amount of the pension payment. We estimated that this would benefit about 80,000 age pensioners and veterans who are choosing to work. Under our announcement, pensioners would continue to accrue unused pension work bonus up to a maximum of $7,800, which can exempt future earnings from the pension income test. This increase would be reviewed annually.</para>
<para>On 3 August: credit to Senator Dean Smith, who introduced a private member's bill to give effect to the policy announced by the coalition. The bill he introduced also includes extended qualification for pensioner concession cards and suspension of benefits and entitlements instead of cancellation, in accordance with the bill introduced by the former government, as I said, in early February. Additionally, in September the Senate agreed with Senator Dean Smith and the opposition bill, successfully amending the government's social services legislation to include the measures that were contained in Senator Smith's bill.</para>
<para>The first two schedules in this government bill replicate those two measures, so we are in an interesting situation whereby those measures, which were agreed to by the Senate and put forward by the opposition in an attempt to actually get the government to understand the urgency that is required here, were voted against by the government. Those amendments that were contained in the bill were returned from the Senate, yet we see them back here today in this bill. So, we will of course be supporting the bill, save for the amendment I've already announced, because these are measures that were introduced by the former government and indeed encouraged by us in opposition to get the government moving.</para>
<para>So, credit where it's due. Congratulations to the government. They've been slow and, sadly, the workforce shortages faced by Australians since the election in May have just gotten worse and worse. When I have spoken to a number of groups, particularly those representing senior Australians, they have been quite frustrated at the snail's pace that has been adopted by the government on an issue that I think even they concede is a very urgent one. The entire purpose of this bill is to help alleviate those workforce shortages by removing the disincentives for those on a pension to engage in the workforce even more. So, we will of course be supporting them, late though they are.</para>
<para>Schedule 1 of the bill, which relates to the suspension of benefits and entitlements instead of cancellation, will essentially allow for what I mentioned earlier, which is for age pensioners and veterans entitlement recipients to have their payments suspended for up to two years instead of cancelled. That is the essence of schedule 1. The schedule also provides for the same suspension period for partners of age pension, disability support pension and certain veterans entitlement recipients where the partner is receiving a social security pension or other veterans entitlement. This schedule also makes some minor changes to the existing suspension provisions for disability support pension recipients.</para>
<para>Schedule 2, again, we support. It extends the qualification for pensioner concession cards, and this will provide for working age pension, disability support pension and certain veterans entitlement recipients and their pension partners to retain their pensioner concession card for up to two years after their payment ceases.</para>
<list> </list>
<para>Schedules 1 and 2 commence on the latter of 1 January 2023 or the day after the end of the period of one month beginning on the day that the bill receives royal assent. This highlights the urgency that we have tried to bring to this debate, the urgency that we have tried to impart on the government: these workforce shortages are acute and they've been acute for the last five months, since they have been in government. Sadly, we did not see that level of urgency from the government, but, again we will support them because it's better late than never.</para>
<para>Schedule 3, the pensioner work bonus temporary increase, will enable eligible Social Security pensioners over pension age and, again, certain veterans entitlements recipients over the qualifying age to benefit from a $4,000 increase to their work bonus concession balance, and a temporary increase to the maximum concession balance that they accrue until the 30 June 2023. In essence, it just means that pensioners will be able to earn more before the pension income test is applied and their payments are affected. Schedule 3 reeks of a government who saw the announcement that we made months ago and have sought to achieve the same effect in a different way, although there is one significant issue with what the government has announced. This is why I have moved an amendment here. These workforce shortages are not going to go away in a hurry, and levelling the playing field for pensioners and others on fixed incomes to do a little more work won't end the problems on 30 June next year. The problem with schedule 3, the problem with the temporary $4,000 increase, is that it in no way, shape or form takes into account what are clearly going to be ongoing issues into the new financial year. Had the government listened to the opposition, they would have put in place a longer term solution in accordance with what we announced, which would allow for the government to make a decision on a yearly basis. If there were continued workforce shortages or if the policy had to change for whatever reason, the government would have that flexibility to do that. Just giving this sugar hit between now and 30 June will give six months of respite, in a sense, to those pensioners who want to work more. It is a very short period of time, and I think it is very courageous for any government—or indeed any opposition—to assume that the issues that have brought this to the fore are going to be gone in six months time. So we encourage the government to support the amendments we've put in place, which will enable it.</para>
<para>In its prebudget submission last December, ACCI said it well when they noted there is an army of old workers with the skills Australia needs who'd like to work but don't participate in the workforce to the full extent because it reduces their pension. There are so many industries in Australia that are feeling the effects of these labour shortages, which is why we have implored the government to get moving with this and put this on the agenda, particularly in regional areas. As members throughout the House would know, regional areas have felt this in a more acute way than the rest of the country, partly because of depressed labour mobility and, of course, the reduced migration we have seen due to the pandemic over the last couple of years.</para>
<para>These are measures that are really important to businesses throughout our country, particularly in regional areas, and this highlights the problem that employers are still facing. Indeed, the ABS recently reported than almost a third of employing businesses are having trouble finding suitable stuff. I must admit I thought that was a bit low, when I compare that to the anecdotal evidence I get out there speaking to businesses, but, by any measure, the ABS saying a third of businesses are struggling is a huge wake-up call, and we hope these problems will be partly alleviated by this bill.</para>
<para>We know that about 80,000 age pensioners are supplementing their pension income with paid employment. That's part of the reason we made our announcement so shortly after losing government. Yes, it was partly to give effect to things that we had introduced in bill in February, but it was also to get the government moving to create that sense of urgency—urgency that we haven't seen. That announcement was on 26 June. We announced that we would support older Australians by increasing the threshold by which you would have your pension impacted from $300 to $600 a fortnight. It was essentially a very neat way of ensuring that people can double the hours and the amount of income without it impacting their pension.</para>
<para>We support the intent of schedules 1 and 2, which replicate what we put in place in a bill before the election, in February. With schedule 3, as our amendments highlight, there are huge inadequacies. It is being very slow, and the workforce shortages we have been dealing with, as highlighted today, have been here since the election. They've been getting worse since the election. We have had a government on the go-slow with these changes. Indeed, we have a government that voted against identical amendments the last time we sat. There's no obvious explanation why they would have voted against those amendments, supported by the Senate in the last sitting period, yet they will put these forward today. We won't do that. Measures that we supported last fortnight, we will support again. We won't show the same pigheaded this that the government has shown. Sadly, with the government not supporting those amendments when we had a bill return from the Senate with those amendments contained in them, Australians have suffered and waited even longer.</para>
<para>We have a Minister for Social Services who has, sadly, been on a go-slow here and who has, sadly, put in place in schedule 3 a measure that assumes that the workforce shortages and incentives that should be provided to pensioners now will be in place only until 30 June next year. For those pensioners who might be looking at putting in place more permanent work arrangements—going from one to two days on a more permanent level—they have that great uncertainty, under schedule 3 of this bill, of not being able to plan or commit to their employer in any serious way past 30 June. If the government thinks that the workforce shortage issues that have brought this to light are going to disappear by 30 June, they should come out and say it. They should show us what economic evidence they've got to back that up—evidence I've not seen.</para>
<para>In the absence of that, we would encourage the government to support the amendments that I have moved, which would mean that the government will be able to provide a further incentive, post 30 June of next year and into the new financial year, that will provide pensioners with the certainty they need to be able to enter into some of those commitments that they might want to enter into with their employer, doing those extra hours without it impacting their pension. Otherwise, we support the bill, because in the end it contains all of the coalition's proposals, albeit months late. But, as I said, we will support them because it's better late than never.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>DZY</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the amendment seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Gee</name>
    <name.id>261393</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">(Quorum formed)</inline></para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ELLIOT</name>
    <name.id>DZW</name.id>
    <electorate>Richmond</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I also rise to speak on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. I am very pleased to be speaking on this bill today because it really reflects and recognises the importance that this government places on our older Australians and the high respect that we hold them in. As members of this House, we would all have the privilege and honour of representing communities with older Australians. These are the people who built our nation. They've worked hard, raised their families, paid their taxes. They should be treated with dignity and respect, and that's exactly what the Albanese government is doing. We understand our older Australians and are committed to restoring dignity to them.</para>
<para>The fact is that it's only our government who will protect the pension, who'll support those in aged care, who'll provide cheaper medicines for our seniors and who'll also provide a means to be able to earn more whilst not impacting their pension. We know how important that is. Our commitment to providing older Australians with real support includes a whole suite of measures, one of which is our workforce incentive, or the one-off increase in the work bonus income bank. We want to ensure that our older Australians have the option—if they wish to or they want to—to take up work or work some more, and this bill will ensure that our older Australians have the option to take up shorter-term or intermittent work or that older Australians remain in the workforce without fear of losing access to their pension. We know that is a major concern, and that's why we're acting.</para>
<para>We also know that our seniors, our older Australians, have a wealth of experience. They have highly skilled working backgrounds, and that's why our one-off income credit will act as an incentive for them—for those who do want to work—whilst also allowing an immediate boost to the supply of workers. We know this will help in addressing the skills shortage as well. Of course, we know that throughout the country, particularly in regional areas like mine, it is indeed a real challenge. I know from speaking to many seniors in my area that they're very pleased with the government acting so swiftly on this. They think it's really important for those who would like to do some of that occasional short-term work but also for local businesses, which have really been very positive about this move and the difference that it will make, particularly in terms of the extent of the skills crisis that we see and particularly given how much more those of us in regional Australia are feeling it.</para>
<para>The government's Jobs and Skills Summit, which was held earlier this year, saw this government come together with all the states and territories, businesses, community leaders and unions to discuss ways that we could boost the labour supply in order to meet the current shortages. I really commend the Prime Minister and the Treasurer for hosting the really important Jobs and Skills Summit. That's the approach of this government: working with people right across the board to get outcomes. That's exactly what happened; from that summit there were indeed many positive outcomes, and one of the outcomes was that we announced that we'd give older Australians the option to work and earn more. We've heard that from older Australians and from many of their advocacy groups as well because we listen to what people in the community are saying and work with them. So, as I said, we provided this, and now, through the one-off increase in their work bonus income bank, pensioners will be able to earn additional $4,000 without losing any of their pension.</para>
<para>The bill strengthens existing incentives for people over age pension age to take up work or increase the number of hours they work if they want to do so. It's an option that they have if that's what they choose to do. At present, only around three per cent of age pensioners earn income from employment. By providing these incentives and providing opportunities to work more without penalty, even a marginal increase in the number of older Australians in work will benefit those who do want to work and, of course, our local businesses and local economies. It will assist so much. The $4,000 increase will be added to the work bonus income bank of pensioners. Specifically, this will increase the amount pensioners can earn from $7,800 to $11,800 before their pension is reduced. The one-off increase will give our older Australians the option to both work and keep more of their money, and that's what they've been telling us that they want to do.</para>
<para>The work bonus allows pensioners over the pension age to earn an extra $300 per fortnight from work before the income test is applied. The combination of the income-free area work bonus means, for example, a single age pensioner with no other income could earn up to $490 per fortnight from work before their payments began to reduce. Pensioners are able to build up any unused amount of the $300 fortnightly concession in a work bonus income bank, which is also vitally important. This amount can be used to exempt future earnings from the pension income test. It means that a pensioner could choose to do intermittent or seasonal work and still benefit from the work bonus. It's designed to fit the requirements of our seniors and what they have told us they need in terms of their work commitments or the opportunities that they would have.</para>
<para>As I said, from commencement, age pensioners, disability support pensioners and carer payment recipients over age pension age, as well as certain veterans entitlement recipients over qualifying age, will have $4,000 credited to their work bonus income bank. I know many in my community and throughout the country have really welcomed this as a very positive step by the government to provide those incentives for older Australians.</para>
<para>The second key part of the bill means that those on the pension do not have to reapply for payments for up to two years if their employment income exceeds the income limit. Currently, the case is that age pensioners with employment income whose total income exceeds the income limit have their pension cancelled after 12 weeks. Instead, what will actually happen now is that their payment will be suspended for a period of up to two years. If during the two-year period their income is at a level where it can become payable again, an abridged process would assist their return to the age pension. That is a much more reasonable and feasible way to move forward for our seniors. It is a much better way to do it. It also corrects the current system, where social security payments were cancelled after 12 weeks of exceeding the income limit, with people having to start the process again when they were eligible. Having this abridged version makes it a lot easier. What is really important is that, to further remove barriers for older Australians re-entering the workforce, pensioners will also retain access to their concession card. It is vitally important for them to be able to have this card to access so many services. We have listened and we have acted.</para>
<para>We are delivering on our commitment to support older Australians right across the board and we've been doing that since day one of the election of the Albanese Labor government. Firstly, we had the pension increase. It was the largest indexation increase to pension payments in more than 12 years, and it was very much welcomed by pensioners. Since we've been in government, as I said, we have already ensured that more of our older Australians can gain access to the seniors healthcare card allowing eligible seniors and self-funded retirees to receive a number of beneficial health concessions. This has been very widely welcomed, I know, in my electorate and, I'm sure, in electorates around the country, with so many more people being eligible to receive that seniors health card, which is so vitally important. It has been raised by many people in my community for a very long period of time.</para>
<para>We're also delivering cheaper prescription medicines. We know that the maximum cost of medications on the PBS has doubled since 2000, so we're ensuring that millions of Australians will pay 30 per cent less for PBS scripts—again, a major concern among our seniors. In addition, we've introduced legislation to help incentivise our pensioners to downsize by reducing the impact of selling or buying a new home. This measure will allow more time for recipients to complete the process of purchasing their new home without the proceeds of selling a home being subject to the assets test. Of course, the Albanese government is committed to freezing deeming rates at current levels for two years until the end of June 2024—another issue that had been raised with us by seniors.</para>
<para>Through our successful repeal of the cashless debit card, we have put a stop to the former government's harsh plans to force age pensioners onto that card. We have shown time and time again how committed we are to restoring dignity for our older Australians and actually delivering for them. We are doing that through so many measures, whether it be on the health front, the work bonus or providing incentives to downsize. We listen to our seniors and we act. I must say, after hearing some of the speakers in relation to this bill, that they had nine years and they didn't do anything. They didn't actually do anything. It has taken our government to correct a decade of Liberal-Nationals waste, mismanagement and incompetence. That is what we saw.</para>
<para>In fact, the opposition has no credibility when it comes to supporting our pensioners because we saw here time and time again that they routinely made cuts to the pension, froze the pension rates and short-changed pensioners with their deeming rates. We saw that on many occasions. In fact, Deputy Speaker Georganas, you and many members of this House would remember in 2015 that the Liberals and Nationals did a deal with the Greens to cut the pension for around 370 older Australians by changing the pension assets test. The pensioners certainly remember it. I remember the anger in the community at the time about the fact that that happened. So, when we see any of these members of the opposition standing up today to lecture us, I say: 'They had nine years. When did they do it?' They didn't. Instead what they did was make it harder for our pensioners through their cuts, which we constantly saw.</para>
<para>We are committed to constantly helping our older Australians whenever we can. Indeed, in all of those measures that I spoke about, and particularly in the area of aged care, we have acted so swiftly because it's only an Albanese Labor government that supports our older Australians. They were let down by a decade of mismanagement and waste under the former government, but we are committed to fixing that. The bill before us today works to support—and to better support—those seniors who do want to work. It gives them greater capacity to work and also expands the workforce at a time of labour shortages, and we know how vital it is to do that. We have listened to our older Australians. We always have. We've always fought for them and, since being in government, we have continued to deliver. These workforce incentives are the latest measure that we are absolutely committed to delivering. If pensioners do want to work more they can, and their pension will not be impacted.</para>
<para>I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ST</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>EVENS () (): I rise to support the amendment moved by the member for Deakin. As he outlined in his contribution, this amendment doesn't stand in the way of passing the bill. We of course support these three measures, although in schedule 3, we would really love to see more support than has been announced by the government in the recent budget. This comes at a time, of course, where inflation is at a frightening level: 7.3 per cent in the September quarter. It's pensioners and other people on fixed incomes who feel inflation the deepest and the toughest. The previous speaker was talking about the biggest increase in the pension in whatever period of time she quoted. As we know, the pension goes up linked to inflation, and so that the pension increasing because inflation is increasing is a zero-sum outcome; it is just keeping people's heads above water. That's why something happened under the coalition: it's a legislated outcome that happens automatically. Regrettably, under this government it is at the highest level ever because inflation is at such a significant level. That's something which is creating a lot of angst for pensioners and other people who are on fixed incomes, or for those who are on lower incomes. It's because inflation is the most terrible thing for people in those circumstances to have to battle.</para>
<para>Unfortunately, the Reserve Bank and, certainly, the budget papers indicate that inflation is only going to go higher than 7.3 per cent. It was 7.3 per cent in September and the pension was recently increased on inflation figures that might prove to be much lower than the sort of inflation that pensioners and seniors generally are going to have to battle with in the months and possibly even years ahead. Regrettably, every time all these forecasts get updated they are going higher and higher, and not just in this country but around the world.</para>
<para>So 7.3 per cent is tough; that is really tough. And, of course, it's higher than that for some of the staple items in the household budget—like groceries and energy. Energy is 56 per cent over two years. Unless the pension is going up by 56 per cent then the amount of money a pensioner spends in real terms on electricity is going to have to increase dramatically. When you're on a fixed income, that means your discretionary expenditure will have to drop commensurately. It means that there are a lot of things that pensioners in this country aren't going to look forward to doing like they could in the past if prices keep going up in such an out-of-control way, like electricity prices have been confirmed to in the budget by 56 per cent. If that forecast is anything like some of this government's other forecasts then no doubt the next time they update it it will be even higher.</para>
<para>So this is an important time to be doing all we can to help senior Australians—and pensioners, in particular—which this bill does in its three schedules. The first two, as the member for Deakin pointed out, have been lifted from the previous government. At the beginning of the year we put them into the parliament and the new government is adopting them, like many other pieces of legislation which we put through the parliament in recent times. They were introduced and lapsed in the last parliament. Schedule 1 is in regard to the consequences of breaching the income limit on the pension—not being thrown off the pension and having to go through the difficult process to reapply, which is up to two years, and get the pension again. Instead, a person will simply be able to update their circumstances with Services Australia when they are eligible for the pension again; they will be able to start receiving the pension again without that rigmarole. And schedule 2 keeps access to the concession card. People who were receiving the pension and who trigger the income limit because of higher income that they've earned then go off the pension for whatever period of time that might be, but they won't have the concession card taken away from them. That's a very important thing as well.</para>
<para>Schedule 3 is the new and significant element of this legislation. It increases the amount of income people can earn before triggering a loss of the pension or a step down from the full rate of the pension, depending on the circumstances. At the moment, you can earn $300 a fortnight and not have your pension affected. You can also accumulate that in a financial year up to $7,800. You can accumulate that and earn that amount of money before it affects your eligibility for the pension. What the government are doing here, with the intention of this coming into effect from 1 December, is saying that just for the period from 1 December through to 30 June 2023 we will allow you to earn an extra $4,000, which will be accumulated into that income bank. So instead of $7,800 you could potentially go up to $11,800. Between 1 December, when that would be applied, and 30 June you can earn, in this financial year, up to $11,800.</para>
<para>Of course, this is effectively putting in place a policy that was announced earlier in the year by Peter Dutton, at a time when unemployment is at historically low levels. I think the last time unemployment was at 3.5 per cent was the early 1970s. It is a time of extreme labour shortages in our economy; a time, as I have canvassed, that inflation is growing at such a rapid pace that it's putting an enormous amount of pressure on the household budget of everyone, pensioners in particular; and, equally, a time when unemployment is so low. The cost to the budget of unemployment benefit payments is reducing commensurate with that reduction in unemployment. So it is extremely common sense to help our pensioners who want to work and earn some extra money on top of their pension, to support them as best we can to do so and to help the businesses out there who equally have skill shortages. In many ways it's a win-win outcome.</para>
<para>I particularly acknowledge my constituent Mr Ian Henschke, who has been an excellent advocate for Australian seniors on this policy initiative going back way before the last few months. It has been something they have been calling for for a long, long time. I was very pleased when the opposition leader made the announcement of our first coalition policy being to support pensioners who want to earn more before it impacts their pension and obviously provide the equal outcomes for businesses, as far as getting more units of labour into the economy to address skills shortages. Ian has been working on this for a very long time. Through his hard work—and I would think also the fact that we made the announcement—the government subsequently decided that they would put in place a measure that sort of goes down this path.</para>
<para>As the member for Deakin made clear in his contribution, it's the view of the opposition—and I would've thought it was a pretty obvious point to make in the economic circumstances that we have right now—that this should not simply commence on 1 December and end on 30 June 2023, so run for seven months. We've said that we think the $300 a fortnight income limit should increase to $600 a fortnight, and that this needs to apply beyond 30 June 2023, into the future, with sensible periods of review every 12 months or so. I certainly don't think the principle and the point of this policy can be properly achieved by putting it in place in such a contracted period of time and bringing it to an end seven months after it starts. If we are trying to help pensioners who are having their cost of living skyrocket on them, who would like to re-enter the workforce and earn some extra money to help with those cost pressures and save for things that they want to help better enjoy their retirement—as we should absolutely support them to do—then ending this on 30 June is a very short-sighted policy position. It's also not really going to help as many people as it could to properly plan into the future for how they might structure the way in which they earn this extra money. A lot of people would probably avail themselves of seasonal labour opportunities.</para>
<para>If you cannot earn $11,800 a year, it might be that, particularly in regional communities, there are some seasonal opportunities that won't come about between 1 December and 30 June. They might be in a different part of the annual cycle, particularly in the agricultural industries et cetera, and bringing it to an end on 30 June means a lot of people that could be in a position to take advantage of it might not end up doing so because, by the time they put in place the plans and some changes around what they have going on in their lives to take up this opportunity, the opportunity will have been removed from them.</para>
<para>We clearly are going to have ongoing skills challenges in our economy, and we definitely will be having dramatic cost-of-living increases for a long time into the future. That was very regrettably confirmed both by the Reserve Bank, after their meeting last week, and in the budget papers two weeks ago. Both the Commonwealth Treasury and the Reserve Bank of Australia are projecting that inflation is only going to increase from its current levels, and, as I pointed out earlier, unfortunately every time we see these inflation projections and some of the other sub-projections about things like energy costs et cetera, they seem to ratchet up and up and up. For some time now we have not had any economic forecasts that are going anywhere but up when it comes to cost-of-living pressures.</para>
<para>This is a measure that of course puts pensioners in a position to earn more money to help them deal with that cost-of-living burden. We want to do all we can in this place to support them with those challenges, and if inflation is only ever increasing then more and more pensioners understandably are getting nervous about how they're meeting their costs. They're having to make sacrifices and take things out of their household budget, and that's something they shouldn't have to do. Retirement should be something that is enjoyed and that is not a time of financial stress. This measure, if it were extended beyond 30 June, would put people in a position to be able to earn some more money, which would take that pressure off. They may be able to more than take pressure off, which would put them in a position to do more things that they wouldn't be able to do within their existing budget just from the pension and then they'd contribute more to our economy</para>
<para>Employers, particularly those that require seasonal workforces et cetera, would see the opportunity of providing a pathway for people who are on the pension not to take on some permanent full-time role that would breach the income cap but instead to do some seasonal work perhaps or some duties on a weekly basis. Whatever the structure of it might be, increasing the cap from $7,800 to $11,800 just for a five-month period—so $4,000 in a five-month period—is a lost opportunity to provide a lot more benefit to our economy from this policy and to give pensioners the ability to plan with much more certainty into the future about how they manage their finances.</para>
<para>The second reading amendment makes the point about going from $300 to $600 a fortnight and not bringing these measures to a close at 30 June 2023 but instead extending the ability for pensioners to keep earning that higher rate, which is being ever eroded anyway by inflation. By increasing the cap from $300 to $600 when inflation is at 7.3 per cent and possibly going to eight per cent or higher, we see , frankly, that pensioners need this support. They need this option and they need the certainty of it extending well beyond 30 June. I commend this second reading amendment to the chamber. As I say, we support the three schedules to this bill, but we wish that schedule 3 would go further.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">(Quorum formed)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBRIDE</name>
    <name.id>248353</name.id>
    <electorate>Dobell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the Social Services and other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022, and I am so pleased to see so many members of the government in the chamber at this time, because it just shows how important this is to the government and to members like me, representing places on the Central Coast of New South Wales, and people representing electorates right across Australia.</para>
<para>Right now, many industries are struggling to find workers with the right skills to fill vacancies. It's something I hear day to day, including in the health and care sectors. We also have many older Australians who are highly skilled, capable, experienced and keen to work more hours or to rejoin the workforce. Unfortunately, they face many barriers and penalties to working or to working more hours. Deputy Speaker Buchholz, as you'd be aware, this was one of the key issues raised during the government's Jobs and Skills Summit. We're determined, as an incoming government, to listen—to listen widely—and to be inclusive in our decision-making. This was one of the key issues that was raised, and we heard that age pensioners are often overlooked for work.</para>
<para>There is ageism in the workforce, with only around three per cent of Australia's 2.5 million age pensioners currently earning income from employment. It's clear that if we want to address these skill shortages, including in regional parts of Australia, then this needs to change so that senior Australians who want to work or to work more can do so without the risk of losing their pension, can continue to contribute with their experience and their expertise in meaningful ways in many parts of the economy. By providing incentives and increasing opportunities for them to work more without penalty, we could see more older Australians take up work, which would both benefit them and benefit local economies and the businesses that employ them.</para>
<para>I want to speak now about the electorate I represent, Dobell, on the Central Coast of New South Wales. It's known as a very popular place for retirees to live. One in five people in the community that I represent is aged over 65, and nearly 22,000 are receiving the age pension. There are also carer payment and disability support pension recipients who are over age pension age. I have been having an ongoing conversation with Paula Martin, the regional director of the New South Wales business chamber on the Central Coast. She provided me with the latest Business NSW report. According to the latest <inline font-style="italic">N</inline><inline font-style="italic">SW </inline><inline font-style="italic">business </inline><inline font-style="italic">conditions report</inline>, 95 per cent of Central Coast businesses are reporting labour shortages. That is across sectors, across industries, from manufacturing through to hospitality. Shortages are increasingly being reported in middle- to senior-management roles as the Central Coast competes with Greater Sydney and the neighbouring regions for skills.</para>
<para>She pointed out to me that the fastest-growing roles, borne out in the report, in demand across the Central Coast are professional, management, sales and marketing roles, with an increase of over 50 per cent demand year-on-year for these roles locally. What she pointed out to me was that these are roles which older Australians—senior Australians with experience, expertise, skills and knowledge—could take up. She gave me an example of someone who returned to the workforce recently and the contribution that they're making in a middle-management role: mentoring, coaching and genuinely contributing to build the capability of that workforce and that business.</para>
<para>The report also went on to identify, in the latest labour force data, that the Central Coast has at this point in time the lowest workforce participation rate of over 65-year-olds in Greater Sydney. The report says that there are 83,900 people in the greater Central Coast who are over 65 years of age, of which 6,700 are currently employed. What she emphasised to me, and what this report shows, is that, when this legislation is passed, of any region in Greater Sydney, the Central Coast can gain the greatest impact of any increase to productive working hours of mature-age Australians. That will be good for those individuals, good for our local economy and good for the greater economy overall.</para>
<para>The measures in this bill will strengthen existing incentives to pensioners who are over age pension age and who want to take up work or to increase the number of hours that they already work. In communities like mine there are so many people with the skills, experience and expertise who do want to work more but who currently have been held back by some of the penalties and disincentives that are in place. Through increasing the work bonus through the social security income test, with its income-free area and proportional withdrawal rate, combined with the work bonus, pensioners are better off financially if they earn additional income rather than relying solely on income support. A pensioner can earn an amount of income before their pension is reduced, which is known as the 'income-free' area. For each dollar of income over the income-free area the single pension is reduced by 50c. For a couple, each individual pension is reduced by 25c a fortnight for each dollar the couple earns over the income-free area. In addition, the work bonus allows pensioners over the age pension age to earn an extra $300 per fortnight from working before the income test is applied.</para>
<para>The combination of the income-free area and the work bonus means that a single age pensioner with no other income could earn up to $490 per fortnight from working before their payment is reduced. That's significant; it will make a significant difference for the individual and their household. Pensioners can build up any unused amount of the $300 a fortnight concession in a work bonus income bank. This amount can be used to exempt future earnings from the pension income test, which means that a pensioner could choose to do occasional seasonal work and still benefit from the work bonus.</para>
<para>At present, the maximum work bonus income bank balance a person can accrue is capped at $7,800. This bill has two key policies designed to encourage pensioners to work more if they want to. The first is an increase in the work bonus income bank. Age pensioners, disability support pensioners and carer payment recipients over the age pension age, as well as veteran entitlement recipients over qualifying age, will have $4,000 credited to their income bank. The maximum work bonus income bank will increase accordingly, taking the maximum balance from the current cap of $7,800 to $11,800. An eligible pensioner who is currently working and has already benefited from the full value of the work bonus concession, will have their income bank increase from zero to $4,000. Eligible pensioners who do not currently work and already have the current maximum income bank balance of $7,800 will also have their income bank topped up by $4,000. This makes good sense. It's good for the individual person of age pension age and it's good for our economy, and I'm really keen to see what it will mean for the local economy in communities like mine in regional Australia. Because the $4,000 increase will be added to each eligible pensioner's Work Bonus income bank upfront, every pensioner will be able to have an extra $4,000 of employment income disregarded from the income test from the start of this measure.</para>
<para>The second key policy area of this bill is making it easier for pensioners who work to resume the age pension. Age pensioners and equivalent Department of Veterans' Affairs payment recipients with employment income whose total income exceeds the income limit will have their payments suspended for a period of up to two years, rather than cancelled after 12 weeks, which is what currently occurs. This will make it much more straightforward for a person to be able to start work or to work more hours, and then, during the two-year period, if their income is at a level where they become payable again, an abridged process would assist their return to the age pension, to reduce that admin burden on them, which is currently a disincentive for people to participate more if they want to. Abridging and streamlining the reapplication process for age pension payments provides a genuine incentive to engage in paid work for age pensioners who do not want to regularly complete application forms following periods of paid employment.</para>
<para>I also want to go to another initiative of the government. From my personal experience as a pharmacist, running a department in a hospital and hearing from local people, many people say to me that, even if they are working, older Australians often have additional medical needs. One of my constituents, Phil, is the president of a local surf club, Toowoon Bay Surf Life Saving Club, that I'm a member of. Phil often tells me when I'm down on patrol that healthcare costs are the hidden cost of retirement. It's something that he has experienced personally and that many other older Australians experience. He contacted me about the pensioner concession card. What it does is provide access to a range of Commonwealth healthcare concessions, including cheaper prescriptions under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Phil said to me that this will make such a significant difference to older Australians. It will give them peace of mind. With rising costs of living, when they're trying to work out their household budget, this is something that will give them peace of mind. They will know that health care, which is one of the biggest concerns and costs that older Australians have, will be more affordable.</para>
<para>If age pension and disability support pension recipients with employment income are suspended because their income is too high, they'll also be able to keep their pensioner concession card for up to two years. Currently, age pensioners lose access to their pension concession card after 12 weeks, and working disability support pension recipients, after 52 weeks. When a recipient of age pension, disability support pension or certain veterans entitlements is employed and has sufficient income for a pension to no longer be payable and when their partner is also a pensioner, they'll both keep their pensioner concession cards for two years. As I said, Phil contacted me about this. I know this is something that impacts so many older Australians, and it will give them peace of mind to know that their health care is affordable. In this situation, both will be able to easily resume their pension payments within the two-year period if their income reduces to the point where they are payable again.</para>
<para>The other thing I want to go to before I finish is the benefit of workforce participation on someone's mental health and wellbeing. We know that workforce participation improves a person's quality of life, and that's on top of any financial benefits or benefits to their super. For pensioners in paid work, getting more income and additional super can help deal with cost-of-living pressures. But it can also boost their mental health and wellbeing. Beyond Blue have said that around 10 to 15 per cent of older Australians experience depression or anxiety. It's significant that one in 10 older Australians might, in that period of retirement, feel depressed or anxious. We know that, in retirement, finding purpose and making meaningful connections are critical to our mental health and wellbeing, as they are across our life. This is a part of this measure that I think really needs to be spoken about because, for some people, this may mean taking up a part-time job or working a few more hours, and the benefit that that will have to their own mental health and wellbeing is significant. So another part of this is the benefits to someone's mental health and wellbeing, and, given the cumulative impacts of natural disasters and COVID, any measure that the government can take to help boost older people's mental health and wellbeing is one that must be supported.</para>
<para>I'll return now to a conversation I had with Paula Martin, regional manager of the New South Wales business chamber on the coast. Paula joined a jobs and skills summit that the member for Robertson and I co-hosted at the Central Coast Leagues Club ahead of the national Jobs and Skills Summit. Paula said, 'Businesses also stand to benefit from the skills and experience of older Australians, who have much to contribute to the workforce, especially in industries where there are significant shortages, including in teaching and health.'</para>
<para>Paula went on to say that mature-age Australians can help businesses with management skills, mentoring and training and that businesses will benefit from using the knowledge and experience of mature-age Australians to help them develop management experience and upskill their existing workforce to really build that capability of workforces. There is a current shortages of trainers. She goes on to say that we can better leverage the experience and support of this cohort and pass on that experience to others.</para>
<para>As well as this being a measure that will help older Australians return to the workforce or work more hours, if they want to, the benefits they'll get financially, including to their super, it will also boost people's mental health and wellbeing. As I said earlier, and as the government's spokesperson on mental health and wellbeing, we know the significant impacts on older Australians through the COVID pandemic, through isolation, through that loss of connection, and if this measure means that someone is more likely to be able to return to work or pick up more hours, it is something we all should support.</para>
<para>Our government values the contribution that older Australians have made and continue to make to our economy and to the social fabric of Australian society. They continue to contribute as workers, volunteers, advocates, carers, elders, grandparents, good friends and neighbours. On that point, I give a shout-out to my neighbour John, who waters my plants when I am here in Canberra. He is a good neighbour.</para>
<para>Through the measures in this bill, we will support those pensioners who still wish to participate in paid work to do so. I commend the bill to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BATES</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
    <electorate>Brisbane</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That all words after "reading" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">"the House calls on the Government to lift the rate of all income support payments above the poverty line".</para></quote>
<para>Late last month was anti-poverty week and, across the country, activists, campaigners and community members came together to highlight the fact that in Australia, right now, one in eight people live in poverty, and for children that figure increases to one in six.</para>
<para>For those living on Centrelink payments, 62 per cent of recipients are either skipping meals or eating less than they need. In a country as wealthy as Australia, this is simply unacceptable. The Senate Community Affairs Committee launched its inquiry into the extent and nature of poverty in Australia, hearing from community organisations and public housing residents. I want to commend my colleague Senator Rice for her advocacy on this issue and work chairing that inquiry.</para>
<para>The first hearing heard devastating evidence. The Victorian Council of Social Service reminded the committee that by far the most effective policy to combat poverty would be to raise the rate of JobSeeker. They told the inquiry that the rate of JobSeeker is so low that it traps people in poverty. It's no longer a safety net. It's not a springboard to prosperity; it is now a cage. I would like to share some stories of people, who have shared their stories with me, about what it's like to live on income support in Australia:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I am 61 years young and have been on JobSeeker for a year or so. I have had two skin cancer operations, both of which required several months off in the last 12 months leaving me unable to work for months at a time. I was working as a casual doing around 30 hours a week before that earning good money.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Trying to live on the Centrelink payments is impossible. After paying rent there is barely anything left—not to mention gas, electricity, phone/internet, water, fuel/car, after which I was left most weeks only able to afford scraps for food. Meat has been out of the question as were most other items and you can forget anything like clothes and underwear etc.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">It is the most undignified way to live that I have ever experienced and brought with it a deep feeling of shame, worthlessness and anxiety.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I am good with money and sticking to budgets but this was something that could not be balanced which meant using my credit card for simple things like Christmas and Birthday Presents for my Grandchildren—this also accumulated great shame, depression and despair. I have worked my whole life and been an active part of my children's and grandchildren's lives as well as the community but I am too scared to go anywhere unless I absolutely have to now because I need to be so frugal even when it comes to using fuel.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I am sure I am not the only who has fallen on hard times out of no fault of their own and has been put through this humiliation.</para></quote>
<para>I'd like to share one other story:</para>
<quote><para class="block">I'm currently on JobSeeker while studying to join the mental health workforce. My disabilities are chronic, without cure, and I've had to stop taking medication for my mental conditions because the impact on my body conditions was too high.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Every week I'm assessing whether the priority is to buy enough protein to sustain myself, or if I need to make room in the budget for my specialist appointment. I want to get to the bottom of my mobility issues.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">I want to finish my studies and placements so that I can support the wellbeing of my community.</para></quote>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">(Quorum formed)</inline></para>
<para>I think it is quite telling that the coalition would interrupt a story about people's poverty for a quorum call in this place. I will finish the story of my constituents by saying that they haven't been able to save money since they were laid off at the start of 2020. Only due to the generosity of their friends are they mostly still debt free:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Scraping by on income support and the measly $50 of 'rent assist' makes me feel like our government has forgotten what people need to survive in the economy they've created.</para></quote>
<para>These stories aren't unique to JobSeeker but affect recipients of the age pension and all income support.</para>
<para>Despite the clear and present need, the government has not substantially increased the age pension or the rate of JobSeeker in its budget. At the same time, the cost of Labor's stage 3 tax cuts has blown out to $254 billion over 10 years. Make no mistake: poverty is a political choice. It's a choice the Liberal government made for a decade, and now, after its first budget in as many years, it's seemingly the same choice that Labor is making. They've made a political choice to keep people subsisting on income support payments below the poverty line. They are choosing to keep struggling Australians in poverty at the same time that they vote to give themselves a $9,000 tax cut.</para>
<para>But, despite the bipartisan commitment from the old parties to keep people living in poverty, there is a different way. At the last election the Greens took a clear, concrete proposal to provide a guaranteed liveable income for everyone on income support. This would lift all income support rates, including the age pension, to $88 a day. It would abolish cruel, punitive measures like compulsory income management and work for the dole that make it harder for people to access income support. The Greens do not believe we should live to work. In reflection of these values, we believe we must bring the retirement age back down from 67 to 65 so that every Australian pensioner can have access to income support above the poverty line. We'll keep fighting to ensure that no older Australian is left behind. So yes, we will be supporting this bill, because it makes it easier for people to access income support, and we welcome the Labor Party's commitment to taking the small step to support age pensioners.</para>
<para>I want to also thank National Seniors Australia and the other countless advocates who have pushed for a better income support system. The Greens stand with you. We will keep pushing for an increase to income support payments so that they are all above the poverty line.</para>
<para>And I just want to respond to some comments made earlier by the minister that I believe were not a fair reflection on the approach the Greens have taken to the age pension. I want to put it clearly on the record that we took policies to this election that would see an increase to the age pension to $88 a day and earlier access to the age pension, from the age of 65. If anyone in here wants to match these policies, we would welcome that. We want to see an income support system that provides more support, and that's something we will keep fighting for—for age pensioners, for people on JobSeeker, for people on the DSP and for everybody else.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the amendment seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Watson-Brown</name>
    <name.id>300127</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The original question was that the bill be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Deakin moved as an amendment that all words after 'That' be omitted, with a view to substituting other words. The honourable member for Brisbane has now moved, as an amendment to that amendment, that all words after 'reading' be omitted, with a view to substituting other words. The question for the House now is that amendment moved by the honourable member for Brisbane to the amendment moved by the honourable member for Deakin be disagreed to. I give the call to the honourable member for Cowper.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CONAGHAN</name>
    <name.id>279991</name.id>
    <electorate>Cowper</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022 and to support the amendment by the member for Deakin. Arguably, the silent generation and the baby boomers are the hardest-working generations since the industrial revolution. They built this country. We see feats like the Harbour Bridge, the Opera House and the highways around Australia, and many of the people who built those are now our pensioners. And not all of them want to be retired. Not all of them want to play golf or travel around in a campervan, and not all of them who are currently on pensions can afford to do so.</para>
<para>Among those in these two hardworking generations that I talk of—the silent generation and the baby boomers—many are facing tough times, with cost-of-living pressures and increasing fuel prices. Many of them still rent. But what you can say about those generations is that that their work ethic generally was second to none. They got out there and they worked hard. They didn't complain. And, unlike some generations, and I include mine, they didn't have their hand out. They never stuck their hand out and asked for something from their governments. They got up, they dusted themselves off and they got on with it. They worked hard to get ahead. But some of those who worked to support this country and who built this country do rely on their pension, and that is why I support this bill—because they deserve to be able to go out there and put a little bit more money into their pocket to combat the cost-of-living pressures that they're facing today or just to give themselves something nice, a treat, or even to buy Christmas presents for the grandkids.</para>
<para>When you talk to employers in the electorate—and no doubt around Australia, in the electorates of all the members who are contributing today—if you go into a retail shop, a cafe or a restaurant, or industry, the first thing that employers will say to you is 'We cannot find workers; we cannot find enough workers for the floor, skilled or unskilled.' The previous speaker, the member for Brisbane, referred to teachers. We can't find them. And yet they're there, willing to work, but can't because their pension won't allow it. Well, this is a step in the right direction.</para>
<para>I would have liked to have seen a much larger step in the right direction to enable twice the amount—$600 a fortnight rather than the proposed $453—but, as I said, it is a step in the right direction. In Cowper alone, there are some 130,000 eligible voters. Over 30 per cent of those 130,000 are over the age of 67. That's in my electorate alone, so think how many people across Australia would be willing to work. We have a workforce shortage in the agricultural sector—180,000 people. We're seeing farmers plough their fruit and vegetables, their horticultural products, back into the ground because they can't find people to pick it. They can't find the workers who want to go out there.</para>
<para>I've spoken to plenty of pensioners. In fact, over the weekend I was at the Kempsey Riverside Market, and a fellow came up to me and said, 'When is the government going to pass this bill so I can go out and get some work—because it's been four months, five months.' Fortunately we'll be able to do it today, but unfortunately it won't be the amount that he was looking for. I'm sure we all have these stories of pensioners saying, 'I want some more money in my pocket.' And I do commend the government for taking up what was our bill previously and with a relatively bipartisan approach.</para>
<para>Employers know what they will have in pensioners with that work ethic. They know they'll show up, they know they're going to be as honest as the day is long and they know that, at least for part of the time, they'll be able to fill those job shortages—rather than somebody who should be working on the business being there working in the business. I was talking to a lady in a bottle shop the other day, and she was telling me she was on her 17th day straight of doing 12-hour shifts. She was in her late 50s. She said, 'Pat, I just cannot find anyone.' Everywhere I go—and I'm sure you have the same, Deputy Speaker Buchholz—you'll see the signs in the windows: vacancy. My 15-year-old son put four resumes in for four jobs and got all four of them. That's how desperate they are. I wouldn't let him take all four jobs; he's got to do his schoolwork first!</para>
<para>There was another issue raised previously, and it was something I hadn't turned my mind to, but it was an excellent point, and that is the mental health and wellbeing of pensioners from getting out into the community. I know that many of them do volunteer work. Many of them need that camaraderie and need that community support. By getting involved in work, working with other staff members, it actually gives them a form of confidence and will to get out there and be part of the community. In terms of the mental health aspect this can only be a positive thing.</para>
<para>This is based on the coalition's proposed bill, some four months ago, to double the amount of income that age pensioners and veterans can earn without reducing their payments, which in real terms means an increase of potential earnings from $300 to $600 per fortnight, which would go a long way for the pensioners. I do commend the government for recognising that this is a good thing. It's a commonsense thing. It really is. You have a workforce shortage. You have people who want to work. Let's put them together. It won't solve the problem. As I said, we are 180,000 people short in the agriculture sector and that's not looking across at all the other industries and sectors.</para>
<para>I do commend the government. But I would urge them to support the amendment by the member for Deakin. I will support it, even if the government won't support the amendment, because we need to get on with it. We need to give some sort of certainty to those pensioners and veterans out there that they can actually earn some more money, most importantly, to combat these rapidly increasing costs in life. It has been four or five months now, but I am sure that pensioners watching this or listening to this or being involved in this would also urge the government to do the very same thing. Let's not give them a lukewarm, weak cup of tea. Let's give them nice, hot, strong coffee and get it all moving.</para>
<para>Importantly, and I will say it again, I do urge the government to reconsider the strength of this bill as soon as financially viable. I certainly hope it goes further than the sunset clause in the bill. We have to provide that certainty to pensioners and we have to provide that certainty to our employers, not just for the next six months or 12 months but for the next 10 years, for the next decade, to ensure that we can work through these times that are coming that are going to be very difficult. It is going to be difficult for businesses. It will be difficult for the average punter. Prices are starting to rise. We've seen that significantly in gas, petrol and electricity. For a pensioner it must be very difficult under normal circumstances, but where you see electricity prices going up 57 per cent that must be terrifying, knowing that you have a limited amount of money coming in every fortnight and knowing that those cost-of-living pressures are going through the roof. I do commend this bill. I do urge the government to support the amendment by the member for Deakin. I hope that they take it very seriously and think about the pensioners when they do so.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LE</name>
    <name.id>295676</name.id>
    <electorate>Fowler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the proposed amendments to the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. I acknowledge the government's proposal to incentivise pensioners and disability support pension recipients to stay in the workforce in light of these recent workforce shortages. I think this is a step in the right direction. However, I think what this bill does is a drop in the ocean compared to what the government should be doing to get pensioners back into the workforce.</para>
<para>We are in a cost-of-living crisis. With the rising cost of fuel, food and petrol, it comes as no surprise that many pensioners are feeling the pinch. <inline font-style="italic">(Quorum formed)</inline> Many pensioners want the opportunity to earn more income to maintain a comfortable standard of living. According to a recent survey by the Association of Superannuation Funds, only six per cent of respondents believe that the age pension level of about $40,000 a year is enough to retire on. Thirty-three per cent believe a comfortable retirement standard of $65,000 a year would be enough. It's clear that Australians think the pension alone is not enough to help sustain the increased cost of living.</para>
<para>However, under this new work bonus scheme, pensioners could accrue a total income bank of $11,800 a year in which they are able to take seasonal shifts. This gives a potential income of $491 a week for pensioners if they were to work every week for six months, which is about two shifts a week. This scheme was originally meant to last for seven months until June 2023. While this is a good solution for short-term and seasonal workers, it doesn't do much in the way of incentivising seniors to stay in the workforce and to keep consistent shifts.</para>
<para>National Seniors Australia have argued that the six-month scheme is far too short to encourage uptake and that it requires time for the government to effectively communicate these new changes to both pensioners and businesses. Our business community, which is comprised of 98 per cent small businesses, would also require the necessary multilingual resources to inform the senior and pensioner communities of these new work opportunities. However, I'm happy to say that after consultations with my office and that of the member for Mayo, Rebekah Sharkie, the government heard our concerns. The pilot scheme will now be amended to extend until December 2023.</para>
<para>In an electorate like Fowler, where nearly 77 per cent of residents use a language other than English at home, there must be a plan to ensure they're not forgotten by this new scheme due to lack of communication from the government. A one-year pilot program would be long enough to educate and inform my pensioners and businesses, who hail from many different cultural backgrounds, but would also give ample opportunity for new pensioners to take up the scheme. This is definitely a step in the right direction. However, more can be done to incentivise seniors to re-enter the workforce.</para>
<para>National Seniors Australia also raised that the $4,000 limit is far too low to truly incentivise seniors to participate overall, and is not nearly high enough to incentivise pensioners to navigate the complexities of Centrelink. The Department of Social Services has also reported that the original six-month pilot may only result in an uptake of 1,000 extra workers a year, which is a ridiculously slim figure considering we have over 470,000 job vacancies around Australia. What my constituents are calling for are consistent work opportunities, not only so they can put food on the table and increase their quality of life but also so they can be productive citizens and feel like they're part of the community in which they live.</para>
<para>I refer to my constituent, Katherine Allen, who is 29 years of age, has three kids and is on a disability support pension. She has expressed her desire to work and contribute to the local economy. However, she has found that getting consistent work would reduce her pension to the point where it would be impossible to support her and her three children. With three mouths to feed, she says it's more financially viable to stay on the pension rather than to work and has spent her time volunteering for local community groups instead. We must take a look at the entire pension system as a whole, instead of focusing on small schemes that only benefit a few.</para>
<para>It's unfair that pensioners like Katherine are scared of having their pensions taken away just because they want to give back to the community by working at their local cafe or giving a few extra days to a nursing home. If a pensioner were to use up the $11,800 workforce income bank, they're still allowed to earn $190 a fortnight on top of that. However, even this barely equates to a single day's work. If they exceed the $190 limit then their pension is reduced by 50c for every dollar earned over the income limit. This is a small incentive for pensioners to take on a long-term job, if they fear they could have their pensions docked for working extra hours. This would only drive pensioners to work in what the ATO refers to as the 'shadow economy'—working cash-in-hand jobs that are unregulated and untaxable. I know this is very much the norm in the community of Fowler, where many prefer cash-in-hand jobs, as they're deterred by the complex reporting mechanisms of Centrelink and aren't willing to risk their pensions for a few sporadic shifts over the year.</para>
<para>The government must look to invest more into overhauling the pension scheme so that people aren't afraid to work. In saying this, I appreciate the measures taken in schedules 1 and 2 of the bill to ensure that a pensioner's concession card is suspended for two years and not cancelled if their total income earnings taper their pension to nothing. This means that if a pensioner were to lose a consistent source of income or, for whatever reason, chooses to get back on the pension, they should be able to transition back seamlessly through a less-complex system rather than having to go through the process of reapplying for a new pension with Services Australia. This also means that a pensioner is able to access their concession card to access cheaper health services and medicines, which I know that pensioners fear they could lose access to should they take on additional work.</para>
<para>With more and more GPs now having to turn away from bulk-billing, basic health-care services are becoming less affordable for pensioners. The first point of contact with a health issue is now becoming less accessible. GPs in my area who still choose to bulk bill are being so inundated with patients that locals have to wait weeks just to see them. The Australian Medical Association have told me that some of their doctors are at the point where they must stop bulk-billing to run a financially sustainable medical centre, but they refuse to do so as many of their elderly patients would opt to avoid seeing the doctor altogether if they needed to pay out-of-pocket costs.</para>
<para>The repercussions of stopping bulk billing in a low socio-economic area like Fowler are detrimental to the overall health and wellbeing of our pensioner community. With cost-of-living pressures, we cannot expect seniors and pensioners to break their budget just to get simple healthcare services. Giving pensioners the option to work would alleviate so much of the cost-of-living pressures they face today. These changes to the pension are imperative to ensure they can afford to access the health care they deserve, particularly as they grow older. I would like to reiterate that the government must ensure that both pensioners and businesses are informed of this new system, and they must be given the resources and assistance they need for a smooth transition to come off the pension.</para>
<para>It's great that the government is extending this scheme until December 2023, but it also should look to include JobSeeker recipients as part of this scheme. Fowler has the fifth-highest number of JobSeeker recipients in the country. A program like this could incentivise many to come off JobSeeker, to work a few days where they can earn some income and embed themselves in the local community and economy. In fact, 43 per cent of jobseekers are unable to work full time and have partial capacity to work due to disability or sickness, according to the Department of Social Services. However, some recipients are not eligible for the disability pension. These individuals should be given the option of entering the workforce for part-time or casual work to top up their family budget or put away savings for a rainy day, especially in these tough economic times.</para>
<para>I understand the reasons behind why the government is only holding out this program to a limited group. I understand that there is an immediate skills shortage that needs to be tackled. However, there is also a cost-of-living crisis that will go beyond the next 12 months. I hope that the government will consider extending the scheme indefinitely for specific sectors which face ongoing workforce shortages, including the health and disability sectors. In the care sector alone there are currently 74,000 job vacancies, according to the ABS. I know that in my electorate of Fowler aged-care facilities not only need workers but need workers who can assist our non-English speaking residents. With many bilingual pensioners who are ready and willing to work, it only makes sense that they should be given the opportunity to assist other elderly patients who struggle with English and would feel more comfortable dealing with a nurse who can speak their language. The government could do better for CALD communities, and allowing pensioners to work in this sector could alleviate the strain our healthcare system is currently under and also cater to the unique needs of my electorate.</para>
<para>I know this scheme is one small step towards keeping our economy going, but in my opinion the government needs to think bigger. I refer to a community member Brian Caw, who contacted my office imploring the government to allow seniors to work. He was concerned his superannuation could run out in his lifetime, leaving him without a sustainable income as he gets older. Brian believes that, if he were given the opportunity to work, it would not only allow him to afford the bare basics but also improve his quality of life by getting private health insurance or joining a gym. He says, 'Actively deterring potentially hundreds of thousands of people wanting to continue to contribute to the workforce is to the detriment of all.'</para>
<para>The Treasurer said time and time again that we need to cut corners to make up for the nearly $40 billion budget deficit that the previous government has left them. However, incentivising seniors to work is a ripe opportunity that would bring in a huge amount of revenue in income tax. In fact, a study by Deloitte shows that, if we only had an additional five per cent of Australians over the age of 55 back in the workforce, it would boost our economy by $48 billion. If we look towards countries like New Zealand, where pensioners are able to work freely as much as they want without impacting their pension, it would encourage participation in the workforce and improve our economic standing as well. Deloitte's economic modelling found a policy of an opt-in exemption from the income test would be cost neutral if only 8.3 per cent more pensioners re-entered the workforce or worked longer. Beyond this, it would be revenue positive. Pensioners in Fowler are suffering in this cost-of-living emergency. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>My electorate of Lyne has, at least the last time I checked the website of the Department of Social Services, more pensioners that are receiving income assistance than any other electorate, so this bill is of critical importance to many in my electorate. I support the bill, but I have a few questions about it, particularly in light of the comments made by the previous speaker.</para>
<para>The concept that the work bonus amount is increased to $300 per week was a coalition initiative brought about by the workforce shortages as a result of COVID shutdowns and the loss of a lot of our workforce, who returned to their home countries. There are plenty of pensioners receiving the age pension or the disability support pension who would like to work. The disincentives are that if they earn too much then they will earn far less on their pension, so this increase to $300 is welcome. What we argued for is that it should go up to $600 on top of the existing $180 so that they would be able to earn $790 a fortnight without affecting their pension. I think that's a great idea because there are plenty of people who could easily exceed the $300 increase on top of the existing $180, particularly if they're doing seasonal work.</para>
<para>Seasonal work in agriculture and horticulture is very intensive work and some of these places are huge concerns. They might pay $3,000 a week if you're a good worker. I think they should be able to earn this rather than keeping it at this artificial income bank limit which, admittedly, is increased. It should be able to be earned at any time in a calendar year, because then we would have many more people who are receiving the age pension who would be quite happy to go off and work intensively in the harvest. That's when a lot of the regional Australian workforce is critically short. This is rather than leaving fruit on the vine or tree and having things rot which, unfortunately, has happened in this last season because there were not enough horticultural harvest workers. That's a tragedy. Increasing this by $600 a fortnight would basically take it up to the tax-free threshold.</para>
<para>I would have no problem if we were to introduce a scheme like they have a New Zealand. Their workforce participation by pensioners is way in excess of what it is in Australia. When you think about it, it would be good for the economy and, if they're on the age pension, but then working, they go up to the tax-free threshold and, if they earn more, they pay tax. At the moment, there's a disincentive because people start losing their pension. Let's think about it: if they're working and earning money and paying tax, then they're working to pay themselves a pension through their taxpaying. Why doesn't Treasury love that idea? It would make so much sense: businesses would be better off, the economy would be better off, the pensioners would be better off and the tax department would be better off.</para>
<para>But there's this idea that it's a punitive measure to take the person's pension entitlement away just because they want to go and earn extra money. There are a lot of non sequiturs in this argument, but we are left with what's being proposed. Pressure from the Leader of the Opposition, and from us before the election, to increase this work bonus allowance has borne fruit and is coming in. But I urge the government not to limit it to the end of 2023 but to keep it going ad infinitum, because we're going to have workforce shortages for years—until the normal flow of youth visas and temporary migrants who come here for a year or two and who work in various jobs in regional Australia is restored. I don't know any industry that has a full workforce at the moment in regional Australia—whether it's in on-farm or off-farm jobs; in factories or in small businesses; in retail or hospitality or tourism, you name it, there are shortages everywhere. There are so many people who are retired teachers, or just people who have worked in blue-collar jobs, who would love to earn a bit extra but don't want to work all the time. You could have people doing locums in schools, in nursing—in all sorts of industries that are critically short of skilled and trained staff. It also facilitates a lot of people who might come into a business in a training role, because a lot of people with trade skills can be of great value to a business. When you take on apprentices, you don't really get a lot of value out of them because you're tying up a productive worker in supervising them. But if you had highly skilled tradespeople coming back from retirement to do on-the-job training with apprentices, it would be good for the business, good for the retiree pensioner and good for the apprentices—they get the benefit of hands-on supervision without the pressure to just get the job done.</para>
<para>There are a lot of good things in this bill, but I must say we could look at this whole issue in a different light. I understand the financial departments think it is a bit of a rort but, really, the minuscule number of people who are working is a testament to how negatively it is seen. The good thing is that if they do exceed the work, they will just have their pensions suspended, not cancelled as under past legislation. That is a good initiative, and we supported that when we introduced it in the first place. I thank members of the Senate who brought this on again and led to it coming back into this House for review.</para>
<para>The provisions that apply to disability support pension workers is also generous—otherwise, you'll have many of these people on DSPs just surviving on the pension and not contributing at all. Obviously, if they have qualified for a DSP, they will not be able to work full-time, but when you have no workers, someone there for a day or two is a lot better for a business than having no one. In hospitality in my region, some cafes and restaurants don't open on weekends—and we're in a tourism hub—because they haven't got enough workers. It's across the board. There is a chronic and acute shortage in regional Australia. With the next picking seasons, we will have many more pensioners—the silver wanderers in caravans—turning up to work on farms during harvest because they feel they're not going to go ahead two steps earning work but then have their pension drop off over a cliff.</para>
<para>I commend this bill to the House, although I do recommend that the government now keep an eye on this and extends it forever. It's a step in the right direction, and when the Treasury realises how much extra growth in the economy we get because we have people working again, it may take our advice and extend it up to the full tax-free threshold, rather than this artificial low level that it's stuck at now.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
    <electorate>Fisher</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak on the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. At the outset I will say that, on the face of it, the government supports this bill, with a second reading amendment calling on the government to increase the work bonus to $600 a fortnight from 1 July 2023. This is, yet again, a bill whereby essentially the government is copying some good ideas from the coalition, both when we were in government and now whilst we are in opposition.</para>
<para>I want to talk a little about the good people of Fisher. Fisher is still regarded as a rural seat. Some people might find that a little bit hard to believe, with the great places of Mooloolaba, Kawana—I know the member for Braddon is having a bit of a chuckle, but we have significant farming and agricultural pursuits in the good seat of Fisher. We have a great deal of strawberry farmers, pineapple farmers and macadamia nut farmers. We have cattle farmers, like the good member for Braddon sitting here at the box. He's not the only cattle farmer in the country, although he pretends he is; he might say he's the best! But the good people of Fisher are a very good growing, agriculture community, and I'm very proud to represent them.</para>
<para>But what a lot of my farming constituents are telling me—and in fact a lot of business people—is that they just cannot get staff. We're seeing cafes closing. We're seeing cafes open for only certain hours of the day. We're seeing many businesses where the business owners are absolutely being pushed to the point of exhaustion because they are having to work longer and longer hours because they just simply can't get staff. We're seeing the destruction of crops because they can't be picked.</para>
<para>These are very real issues, and when you look at the No. 1 burning issue that's troubling Australians at the moment it is of course cost of living. Australians are really feeling the pinch right now. When we find a situation where employers can't get the workers that they need to be able to run their businesses, we're heading towards dangerous times in this country. It is just so incredibly important that, as a parliament, we look at all avenues to try to free up that labour marketplace to get as many people as we possibly can into employment. Those who might be listening to this—thank you!—and who are at an age where they've retired may not want to work, and that's fine. But equally, many people who are on the age pension or veterans pensions, who are certainly on a fixed incomes, with the rising cost of living, are having trouble making ends meet. And that is axiomatic. We know from the budget just last week that our electricity prices are set to increase by 56 per cent over the next two years. Gas prices—and these are figures based on the government's own numbers—are tipped to increase by 44 per cent over the next two years. The price of diesel is absolutely out of this world at the moment. Petrol is around $1.75 a litre on the Sunshine Coast. Diesel, for some unbelievably unknown reason, is somewhere around $2.35 or $2 40 a litre.</para>
<para>If you're a retired person who might enjoy going up to Fraser Island on occasion, as many people in Fisher do, then you probably own a four-wheel drive—a diesel four-wheel drive—and you're paying $2.35 a litre to put diesel in it. These cost-of-living pressures are set to increase and to increase significantly. So, as I said, we need to do everything we can in this place as an opposition to work collaboratively with the government to try to ease the cost of living for Australian families. I recently did my 'Tour de Fisher', where I rode my pushbike around the electorate—in lycra, I might add—for my state colleagues. I have to say that almost every person I met—</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms McBride</name>
    <name.id>248353</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>A tour de Fisher?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WALLACE</name>
    <name.id>265967</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I do it over a week, member for Dobell. I talk to over 130 constituents and almost all of them talk to me about the rising cost of living. When I was interviewed by a local radio station a couple of days later, they said, 'What's the burning issue on the Sunshine Coast?' I said this: 'The burning issue is cost of living, cost of living, cost of living.' Everybody—and I mean everybody—is feeling the pinch at the moment.</para>
<para>When you've got people who are feeling the pinch, which is just about everybody, and you've got businesses that can't get staff, it stands to reason that we do what we can to try and get as many pensioners, age pensioners or veterans who are on a pension, back to work, if that is what they would like to do. Certainly, many of them are saying that is exactly what they want to do.</para>
<para>The bill amends the social security law and Veterans' Entitlement Act 1986 to encourage age pension, disability support pension, carer payment and veterans entitlement recipients over age pension age to engage in paid employment. This includes suspending the benefits and entitlements instead of immediate cancellation, allowing for a more streamlined step-up or step-down from the incentives. It means extending the qualification for pensioner concession cards and temporarily increasing the pensioner work bonus.</para>
<para>Once again, this policy reflects measures proposed by the coalition in government. On 10 February 2022 the coalition, when it was in government—I remember those glory days—introduced the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022 to incentivise recipients of the age pension, disability support pension and certain veterans entitlements to undertake or increase paid employment. Under the coalition's legislation, pensioners with employment income whose total income exceeded the income limit would have their age pension suspended for a period of up to two years rather than cancelled after 12 weeks. If at any time during the two-year period their income was at a level that they could return to the age pension, they would benefit from an abridged reapplication process that only required them to update their circumstances, including their income and asset information with Services Australia.</para>
<para>The coalition's bill also allowed for working age pensioners, disability support pensioners and certain veterans entitlement recipients and their pensioner partners to retain their pensioner concession card for up to two years after their payment ceases. After the election, the coalition announced that a Dutton government would support older Australians who chose to work more by doubling the amount of income that age pensioners and veteran service pensioners could earn without reducing pension payments. This would enable pensioners and relevant veteran entitlement recipients to earn up to $600 a fortnight work bonus and still receive the maximum amount of pension payment. This would benefit 80,000 age pensioners and up to 22,000 residents of Fisher—my electorate has the largest demographic. Pensioners would continue to accrue unused pension work bonus amounts up to a maximum of $7,800, which can exempt future earnings from the pension income test. The increase would be reviewed annually.</para>
<para>This coalition policy makes it further worthwhile for older Australians to pick up an extra shift or work extra hours and help small and regional businesses deal with labour shortages. Back then, the coalition called on the Albanese government to implement the policy immediately, to help relieve pressure on a very tight labour market. And all we got from the government was silence. It took the Jobs and Skills Summit to drag the Albanese government belatedly into this policy space. While welcoming the government's long overdue announcement of an increase in the work bonus income bank balance, we said it was too little, too late.</para>
<para>On 3 August Senator Dean Smith introduced a private senator's bill to give effect to the policy announced by the coalition. The bill also included extended qualification for pensioner concession cards and suspension of benefits and entitlements instead of cancellation, as per the bill introduced by the former government on 10 February. Additionally, in September, the coalition successfully amended other government social services legislation in the Senate to include the measures contained in Senator Smith's bill. This legislation is yet to return to the House of Representatives.</para>
<para>The first two schedules in this government bill replicate the measures in the coalition's bill introduced in February and in Senator Smith's bill. We take issue with the lesser financial incentive though. The government's alternative is a financial incentive less than the increase the coalition's policy would provide, and it's only a temporary measure, due to expire on 30 June 2023. So not only is it less than—half, in fact—what the coalition put forward only a couple of months ago; it is a temporary measure. That's why the coalition is calling on the government to increase the Work Bonus from $300 to $600 a fortnight to incentivise eligible pensioners. Increasing the amount pensioners can earn every fortnight will make a meaningful difference to household finances, and the coalition calls on the government to increase the fortnightly Work Bonus from $300 to $600 from 1 July and provide certainty by actually making it ongoing. By all means have a review, as is often the case in this place. Write into the legislation that, after 12 or 24 months of the operation of the act, a review could be undertaken to determine whether it's still necessary and whether it's still of utilitarian value. But at this stage we would suggest that this is something that we should be looking at continuing.</para>
<para>Now, whilst we will support this bill, with amendments, it demonstrates two things. Firstly, it demonstrates that this Labor government does not have a real plan to address the cost-of-living pressures faced by Australian families and their businesses. I talked a lot about that at the commencement of my speech. Secondly, even in opposition, the coalition is delivering for our most vulnerable, including our veteran community. It was the case with Veterans' Affairs reforms. It was the case with downsizing incentives and with PBS co-payments. When it comes to health care, social care, employment support and veterans' care, it has always been the coalition that has had a plan to support Australians in need. Meanwhile, Labor cut services in the regions. We saw that in the budget just a couple of weeks ago. They slashed progress made in first responder and veterans' mental health support. And, boy, I can't wait to get 15 minutes in the debate on the appropriations bill to talk about those two issues.</para>
<para>This is a government that is all talk and smoke and mirrors. We'll continue to hold them to account, backing good policy—which is usually our policy that they're copying—but we will fight them tooth and nail to ensure that Australian families and their businesses get the best out of this parliament, because they deserve nothing less.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:03</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SHARKIE</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
    <electorate>Mayo</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of this bill, the Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022. I'm pleased that the government has listened and chosen to amend the bill to extend the legislation to 31 December 2023. Previously, as we know, it was scheduled to end on 30 June 2023. For those of us in regional electorates, we also know that that, hopefully, gives us just one more harvest where we might incentivise pensioners and make it easier for them to potentially work in the harvest, because this is an incredibly difficult time of the year to get workers in regional Australia.</para>
<para>Providing incentives for older Australians to engage in additional work is a concept that I strongly support and one that I have advocated for, I think some could say, rather vigorously. On the first day of August this year, I moved a notice of motion calling on the government to introduce an opt-in scheme to increase the income test threshold for pensioners with limited savings as an incentive to engage in paid work. This was undertaken after receiving countless requests from constituents for changes and extensive consultation with National Seniors Australia. The message received was very simple, many people who are on the age pension want to work. They might not want to work full-time, but a couple who are travelling might want to do blocks of work. With Australia's unemployment rate historically low at just 3.5 per cent—it is the slowest rate, certainly, in my lifetime—we're effectively in full employment. This is a good thing, but it has created an increasingly tight labour market with high demand for engaging and retaining workers, particularly in the regions. When it's cherry season, when it's apple season, when it's strawberries season we need as many hands as we can possibly get. It becomes incredibly difficult for employers to find and attract staff.</para>
<para>On a weekly basis I am reminded by local businesses desperately looking for staff that this is not just in horticulture and agriculture, this also extends to the care sector as well. In Australia workforce participation rates for people aged 65 years and older are among the lowest in developed nations. We are currently at 14.2 per cent. This compares with the OECD average of 15.3 per cent. Sweden is 19 per cent. The United States is 19.4 per cent. Our New Zealand neighbour is 24.8 per cent, and that's really significant considering we're just across the ditch and yet our percentages are so different, our participation is so different.</para>
<para>Workforce participation among pensioners with limited savings is even lower at just three per cent. The data and anecdotal evidence strongly suggest there is an underutilised workforce available to us. However, older Australians are prematurely leaving critical sectors such as aged care, allied health, teaching and student support, because of the penalty associated with working and the consequence of a reduction in pension entitlements. A serious concern for pensioners is the anxiety and stress caused by dealing with Centrelink every fortnight. This is unnecessarily disincentivising pensioners and their engagement in the workforce.</para>
<para>According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, there are 107,000 people aged 60 to 69 who are no longer in the labour force, not retired and not currently employed but wanting to work part-time. But they're not engaging because of the fear of having a debt, the fear of potentially receiving a letter saying, 'We're cutting off your pension.' I am sure many people in here have assisted older people with applying for the pension. This is not an easy process and it takes a long time, so their fear is very real and I understand that.</para>
<para>National Seniors Australia found, in their recent survey, that one in five pensioners would consider re-entering the workforce, and this was prior to the latest inflation and cost-of-living increases. Recent increases to power prices, the projected inflation and the even greater power costs will substantially impact the budgets of all Australians, and particularly pensioners who now have even less money to dispose of.</para>
<para>This bill will give those pensioners who want to work the opportunity to do so without unfair financial penalty. This is so good for regional Australia.</para>
<para>I was hoping that the government would lift the threshold even more because, when older people are travelling around Australia, they're often in their caravan and so they're staying in our regions for a considerable period of time and many of them do want to work. I know that when they do work, whether on mango farms or in the care sector or helping out in the schools, they have the qualifications and they have the knowledge. I just don't think we utilise this wonderful workforce, this wonderful group of people who want to work. The best thing about the region is, if they're saying for months at a time in a particular region—maybe down in my electorate or up in Queensland or over in WA—they spend more of their money back in the region, so they're helping to grow the local economy.</para>
<para>This bill, while I do support it, I think it could go much further. I guess I'm flagging that my advocacy will not stop here. I'm also flagging that I will be supporting the opposition's amendments because I think they're very sensible amendments. We really want to make it as easy as possible for older Australians who still want to be connected to the workforce to be part of helping to remedy the great challenges we're having with respect to workforce shortages at the moment. I'm pleased to support this bill and very pleased that crossbench initiatives such as this are taken up by the government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RYAN</name>
    <name.id>249224</name.id>
    <electorate>Lalor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Workforce Incentive) Bill 2022 delivers one of the government's commitments to address Australia's market challenges through practical and targeted solutions consistent with its announcement at the Jobs and Skills Summit in early September. It strengthens existing incentives for people over age pension age to take up work or increase the number of hours they work, if they wish to do so. At present only around three per cent of age pensioners earn income from employment. By providing incentives and increasing opportunities to work more without penalty, even a marginal increase in the number of older Australians in work will benefit individuals and businesses.</para>
<para>Through the social security income test, with its income-free area and proportional withdrawal rate, combined with the work bonus, pensioners are better off financially if they earn additional income rather than relying solely on income support. Pensioners are able to earn an amount of income before their pensions begin to be reduced in the income-free area. For each dollar of income over the income free-area, the single pension is reduced by 50c. For couples, each individual pension is reduced by 25c a fortnight for each dollar of income the couple has earned over the income-free area. In addition, the work bonus allows pensioners over age pension age to earn an extra $300 per fortnight from work before the income test is applied. A combination of the income-free area and work bonus means a single age pensioner with no other income could earn up to $490 per fortnight from work before their payment begins to reduce.</para>
<para>I've listened to many of the speakers this evening on this legislation and the amendment, and I think some important points have been made. I note the member for Mayo referenced retired teachers in this space and I see them as potentially quite useful in schools, given the current staff shortages. Particularly, as it's my background, I would make the suggestion that highly skilled teachers who have retired might return to fill some of the chronic shortages we have around literacy and numeracy specialists. They might find work in a situation with a very small group of students or even one-on-one in a mentoring or coaching role. It would be good to have that kind of experience and knowledge and the years and years built up around literacy learning back in schools—not necessarily on a full teaching day because I don't know that even I could return to a full teaching load, at my young age! A full teaching load is extraordinarily stressful. In a high school you could potentially have 300 students across that week, so when it comes to report writing that means you're going to write 300 reports. There's a good reason why lots of teachers take time out of schools earlier than workers in other industries perhaps. But this would give us an opportunity to bring people back into those specialist roles in schools, potentially, and bring back their expertise, their insight and their many, many years of looking at ways to support students to make those next steps in literacy and numeracy which are critical in our schools. So, I can see this really working in that profession.</para>
<para>And I assume there are many other areas where someone on an age pension might relatively return to the workforce. Of course, I by no means would support the notion that this would mean we'd have age pensioners climbing trees. I think that would be very short-sighted in terms of people's physical capacities. I'm also of a mind to think carefully about those people who've worked in hard manual labour all their lives. I wouldn't want to create an expectation that they would return to hard manual labour past retirement. They might, however, find other work for those hours a week that they chose to and to create incentives where that might be possible. Some of the changes of late, whereby workplaces are more open to people working from home, might also suit some people who are wanting to take up these incentives.</para>
<para>The bill has two key policies that are designed to incentivise pensioners to take up work if they wish to do so. The first is temporarily increasing the work bonus income bank. The government has listened to the concerns of key community stakeholders and our parliamentary colleagues in this place and the Senate that seven months is not enough time to assess the effectiveness of this policy change. Today the government has amended the bill so that a temporary increase to the work bonus income bank would cease on 31 December 2023. This extension results in a minor increase in the cost of the measure of around $2.5 million.</para>
<para>I think with this measure, which came out of the Jobs and Skills Summit, the government is meeting the commitments it has made. We're hoping that, for pensioners who want to take up this opportunity, this bill will support them more readily to do so and will make the difference in terms of when they go over the incentive limits—that the bill actually shapes that so that it's less punitive for people and works in a way such that they might re-engage with the age pension if they get beyond the income point where they lose the pension. So, thought has been put into ensuring that this bill allows people on the age pension to re-engage in the workforce or to continue to work, to take up hours in the workforce and not be punished financially, through their pension. It's a bill that's thoughtful. It's a bill that allows the best of both worlds. As I said, the proportion of people on the age pension who are currently doing the hours of work is at three per cent, and some increase in that could potentially be expected with these incentives in place.</para>
<para>It is a hallmark of this new government that we are prepared to listen, that we are prepared to take things on board. That was seen in the Jobs and Skills Summit, where this first came up. The Jobs and Skills Summit created a space where many people gathered to share ideas about how we could best deal with the jobs and skills shortage. One of the responses can be seen in this bill, but obviously many other ideas came out of the summit.</para>
<para>The consultation with community stakeholders has been quite detailed, and this government and this minister have listened intently to the ideas coming from others. That means that recipients of the age pension and certain veterans' entitlements who have employment income and whose payments are suspended because their income is too high will also keep their pensioner concession card for up to two years. This is an important point, because losing that pensioner concession card would be an absolute disincentive because, often, as we heard the member for Dobell say earlier, ageing comes with an increase in health costs. So keeping that concession card for a two-year period is something that's very thoughtful in this bill.</para>
<para>I would like to thank the minister for her work in making sure that this bill supports pensioners and supports them in thoughtful ways by ensuring that, if they do choose to take up work or increase the hours that they're working, the impact of that has been considered and things have been put in place in this bill to ensure that they are not negatively impacted.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>09:21</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>In summing up, I'd like to thank all members who have been part of this debate today. I think this has been a very constructive debate in which people have clearly indicated a common desire—that is, to support our pensioners to be able to work more, particularly at a time when we've heard that, right across the country, there are skill shortages, and those skill shortages in some places are quite acute. That is why the government has put forward this bill. It does deliver on one of the government's commitments: to address Australia's labour market challenge through practical and targeted solutions.</para>
<para>This was, as I said, an issue that came up at the Jobs and Skills Summit early in September. The Jobs and Skills Summit was a particularly important gathering in which we were able to examine a range of different solutions, and this is one of the solutions because it strengthens the existing incentive for people over age pension age to take up work or to increase the number of hours they work if they wish to do so.</para>
<para>The bill also provides that age pensioners and those receiving equivalent Department of Veterans' Affairs payments will no longer have their pension cancelled after 12 weeks if their income, where it includes some income from employment, exceeds the income limit. Instead, their payments will be suspended for up to two years. An abridged reapplication process will be made available to them should their income no longer preclude them from those payments.</para>
<para>Pensioners whose payments are suspended will keep their concession card for two years, instead of it being cancelled after 12 weeks. So they will retain access to a range of benefits, including cheaper prescription medication. Certainly, in my time recently as the Minister for Social Services, I know that being able to keep that pensioner concession card is really important—being able to retain this and the range of benefits. It's not only Commonwealth benefits; of course, the benefits that the state governments have to offer are really important.</para>
<para>The benefits of this measure also extend to partners of age pensioners, disability support pensioners and equivalent veterans payment recipients, as long as their partner is also receiving the age pension. This measure will strengthen the incentive for older Australians to work, so it is critically important.</para>
<para>I would say at this point that, quite obviously, the government won't be supporting the second reading amendment moved by the opposition. We believe that the proposal that we are putting forward is the right proposal for the right time. This is a time limited proposal, particularly in the area of workforce shortages, when there is an acute need for labour, and we want to provide that upfront income bank to really give that a boost right now. But I foreshadow that we will be moving a government amendment in this place in the consideration in detail stage, which is likely going to happen tomorrow. This is as a result, really, of us listening to the concerns of many in this place. I do note the member for Mayo and the member for Kooyong, as well as Senator Rice in the other place, who did make the point around the length of time. I will be talking to that amendment, but I do foreshadow an amendment in consideration in detail that will provide for this Work Bonus incentive to be extended and be available for 12 months.</para>
<para>This is the way the government has listened and has found what I think is a good, sensible amendment that we will move in consideration in detail, but we won't be supporting the opposition second reading amendment. It doesn't fit with our policy. Neither will we be supporting the Green's second reading amendment, while very noble, to increase the rate of all income support recipients. It's not something that we will be supporting as part of this bill. This is really a sensible proposal, because, of course, at present, only around three per cent of age pensioners earn income from employment, but by providing this incentive and by increasing opportunities to work—even this most marginal increase—a number of older Australians will benefit. Obviously, individuals benefit. I was having a brief conversation with the member for Mayo, who was talking about the great outcomes that happen. My mother, indeed, retired only last year. I probably don't want to give her age away in this place, but she definitely saw the benefit of working after retirement age. So this is an important piece of legislation, and we look forward to voting on this tomorrow. I know that we won't have a vote until tomorrow morning.</para>
<para>In regard to the proposal before us, we have amended the bill, as I said, to have a temporary increase to the Work Bonus. We foreshadow the amendment for that bank, which will cease on 31 December 2023. This extension results in a minor increase to the cost—around $2.5 million over the year—but all of us, I'm sure, will be focused on making sure that pensioners will be communicated with about this. This increase in their income bank is really important because it will allow for that flexibility as well in that upfront bonus.</para>
<para>This is, I think, a really important bill. In addition to keeping the card, this does provides it upfront. I do want to talk a little bit about the benefits of that Work Bonus income bank upfront, because one of the constraints in having an increase in how much you can earn on a fortnightly basis is that it doesn't perhaps take into account some of the seasonal aspects of work. I really like the Father Christmas example. That is a very intense amount of work in a short period of the year, and, of course, without the income bank flexibility, you wouldn't necessarily get to do that sort of intermittent work over the years. That's where I think the bank is particularly important. It will be, as I said, provided upfront, so if pensioners have been waiting and it has been a disincentive for their pension, there will be a real opportunity now, as soon as this bill gets royal assent, for them to be able to go out there and take up those work opportunities.</para>
<para>This complements a range of measures that we have put in place to support senior Australians through our seniors pensioner card, which really came into effect, and I would encourage senior Australians who may not have been eligible before to get on that website and see if they're eligible. This is just another plank in this government's proposal to make the lives of our pensioners and seniors better.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
<list> </list>
</speech>
</subdebate.2></subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>ADJOURNMENT</title>
        <page.no>98</page.no>
        <type>ADJOURNMENT</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Canning Electorate: Health Services</title>
          <page.no>98</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HASTIE</name>
    <name.id>260805</name.id>
    <electorate>Canning</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>As you know, Mr Deputy Speaker Goodenough, the city of Mandurah in the heart of my constituency is home to over 90,000 people. Its population has more than doubled in the last 20 years to become one of the biggest cities in Western Australia; however, local services have not kept up with that population growth. A perfect example is the Peel Health Campus. The Peel Health Campus is the only major hospital in Mandurah and the broader Peel region. It was built in the nineties, and since then has remained largely unchanged. Back in 2019 I ran a grassroots campaign and, with the people of Mandurah, secured $25 million from the previous coalition government to upgrade the emergency department at the hospital.</para>
<para>But what has the Premier, Mark McGowan, and the WA state Labor government done since they came to power in 2017? They've poured $10 million into a new car park. The hospital is yet to receive upgrades promised by the Premier and WA state Labor over a year ago. Peel Health Campus no longer has the capacity to properly service the needs of our community. We have unacceptable emergency waiting times, insufficient services, pensioners without ready access to important treatments and record high ambulance ramping times. This is quite shocking: last month ramping hours skyrocketed to more than 565—that's more than 18 hours a day.</para>
<para>Since then WA has earned another shameful title, reporting its worst annual ambulance ramping figures on record. In just 10 months, ambulances have spent more than 54,000 hours ramped outside WA hospitals. When WA Labor came to government in 2017, annual ramping sat at 9,819 hours. Nurses are working double shifts to make up for staff shortages and still Premier Mark McGowan is slow to listen and slow to act on this issue. The evidence is right in front of him, yet he continues to deflect by blaming our failing hospital system on a decline in GP numbers and bulk-billing practices. Let's not forget: these are not just figures; these are Western Australians waiting outside hospitals in an ambulance for life-saving treatment, and there is a human cost to this.</para>
<para>My constituents have reached out to me with their experiences at Peel Health Campus. One of the most troubling was from Jean, aged 88, from Meadow Springs. On 26 September Jean began experiencing sharp pain in her feet and legs. She was reluctant to go to hospital as her last visit, 10 days earlier, resulted in her sitting in a waiting room in the emergency department for eight hours. After enduring excruciating pain for two days, in which she was unable to stand and needed to crawl on her hands and knees to the toilet, Jean called an ambulance on 28 September. Ambulance staff assessed her and took her straight to the Peel Health Campus at 9.45 am. For the entire day Jean sat in a wheelchair in the waiting room with no pain relief, no food and no water.</para>
<para>At about 8.30 pm Jean and other patients in triage, many of whom were elderly, were advised that the hospital was extremely short-staffed, there were no beds and no medical assessments would be done that evening. The patients waiting in the emergency department had two options: either find their own way to Rockingham hospital, about 40 minutes to our north, or go home. Jean, still in severe pain and unable to stand, was put in a taxi and sent home. She was in such distress and pain that she asked a taxi driver to stop in at her neighbour Vicki's house.</para>
<para>It was Vicki who brought this terrible experience to my attention. In a letter to me, Vicki wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It is absolutely disgusting and shameful that we do not have adequate facilities to treat our elderly with the respect and dignity they deserve.</para></quote>
<para>Vicki is right: this is just not good enough. The people of the Peel region elected three state Labor members of parliament who have all remained silent on this issue: David Templeman, the member for Mandurah; Robyn Clarke, the member Murray-Wellington; and Lisa Munday—an ex-paramedic herself—the member for Dawesville. They should hang their heads in shame for not standing up for our community or for advocating within their government. I note that David Templeman is in the state cabinet. We should have better advocacy from our local state members.</para>
<para>WA trusted Premier Mark McGowan and, month after month, he continues to let us down. It is time for him and his government to act and to deliver the health services the people of the Peel region deserve.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Guru Nanak</title>
          <page.no>99</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ROB</name>
    <name.id>M3E</name.id>
    <electorate>McEwen</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>MITCHELL () (): Waheguru ji ka khalsa waheguru ji ki fateh. This week, Sikhs around the nation, including hundreds of people in McEwen, will be celebrating and honouring the 553rd anniversary of the birth of Guru Nanak. In the words of the Guru Nanak biographies:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The Bounteous Lord heard the anguished cries (of humanity), and so, Guru Nanak, He sent to this world of woe.</para></quote>
<para>Tonight I'm pleased to honour and celebrate in this place the one who began the great religion of Sikhism, Guru Nanak Dev. From what I have read of his early life, it's safe to say that it's not a surprise that he did not follow in his father's footsteps into accounting. I think one early example from the biographies we now have of Guru Nanak is his decision as a young boy to refuse to wear a thread of caste. Nanak refused to wear the thread, arguing that caste should not be used as a means of judging a person. This we of course now see as an idea replicated across the globe: that a person is able to, and should be given the right to, show what and who they are based on their character. But in that time and place, such ideas were radical and progressive.</para>
<para>Although we have many stories of the young Nanak, his main teachings and realisations are said to have begun when he reached the age of 30, in around 1499. Nanak taught that God was beyond religious dogma and external definition. He said he would follow neither the Muslim nor the Hindu religion, but God's path. He taught that 'there is no Muslim, there is no Hindu'—again, a new way of thinking in a world that was rife with political and social conflict between Islam and Hinduism at the time. During his lifetime, Guru Nanak attracted followers from many religious traditions but, despite this renown, he chose to refuse material gifts, believing that spirituality should be given freely and not be dependent on financial payment. It is written that he said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Even kings and emperors with heaps of wealth and vast dominion cannot compare with an ant filled with the love of God.</para></quote>
<para>This idea translates beyond religion into how we view society as a whole. Wealth cannot buy what a full and honest heart provides for free. These teachings also had profound social implications. Nanak denounced the caste system and moved the religious focus from external aids like rituals and priests, bringing that spiritual focus inward.</para>
<para>Guru Nanak always stressed the inner spiritual awakening. As the first guru, Nanak practised and expounded the central tenets of the modern Sikh faith. We know those to be selflessness, sharing with others and giving to others who are less fortunate, but also a selfless attitude and avoiding the pitfalls of egoism, pride and jealousy; earning an honest living, and living without deceit, exploitation or fraud; and Naam Japna—meditating on God's name and repeating the mantra. Nanak said that, through the repetition of God's name, a follower could free himself from selfish tendencies and cultivate happiness.</para>
<para>Like all enduring religions, these themes have abiding importance in the modern world. Sikhism is a religion whose ideas of selfless service, social justice for the benefit of all and honest conduct are the themes which guide thoughts and actions. That is a tenet that we, as people in public service to our communities, can well understand and are so often striving to make central in our work in government.</para>
<para>Despite being one of the youngest amongst the major world religions, Sikhism is the fifth-largest religion in the world. It's no small thing to reach over 25 million people with a message grounded in oneness, love and, so importantly, social justice. Sikhism has been the fastest-growing religion in Australia since 2011. With many Indian Sikhs, Hindus and Muslims living in Australia, our country is becoming stronger and more diverse as we learn the many lessons in how a big melting pot culture can sustain and grow our national identity and character. We know that right now we are at a time and place in history when understanding and respecting each other is more important than ever. Australia is richer because of the communities, cultures and faiths that are part of our great melting pot.</para>
<para>Although there are often loud voices of dissent to this opinion, we know, through the small acts of kindness and fellowship, that there are many Australians who embrace and celebrate the cultural diversity of our nation. So tonight I want to acknowledge Guru Nanak and many good friends, like my great friend Avtar Singh, who just recently celebrated his 50th birthday, because they are celebrating this auspicious occasion on the Sikh calendar.</para>
<para>We know that, in times of need, the Sikhs in our communities are the first ones out there helping those caught up in floods, bushfires and storms, wherever there is an opportunity to help. Many, many times during lockdowns and bushfires, the Sikh community have been the first ones out there volunteering their time, cooking food, delivering meals and helping people who are alone. I think it is so important that we acknowledge that what we're seeing is a group of people who have come to this country and who, through Sikh Volunteers Australia and through the Australian Multicultural Organisation, have added so strongly to the fabric of what we call mateship. They help us, they work with us and we should acknowledge them for that.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Economy</title>
          <page.no>100</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr</name>
    <name.id>241067</name.id>
    <electorate>Banks</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>COLEMAN () (): The world is at a dangerous juncture. The combination of rising security threats and weakening finances will cause great challenges over the next decade. Australia's financial position is much stronger than virtually all of our peer nations, but that strength is not assured in the future and we must defend it.</para>
<para>The coalition has always stood for the bedrocks that make Australia strong: personal freedom and sound financial management. We believe that people's innate desire to pursue their dreams is the most powerful force for good in our society. We believe that government must always manage its finances well so that our nation has resources when it really needs them. Today, Australia's level of gross government debt as a proportion of the economy, at 37 per cent, is much lower than our peers into the developed world. That didn't happen by accident. After years of exceptional economic management, Prime Minister Howard and Treasurer Costello left Australia with no net debt and $50 billion in the bank. The Rudd-Gillard Labor government spent all of the $50 billion and then left Australia with debt of more than $300 billion and a deficit of $44 billion by 2013-14. Throughout the term of the coalition, this deficit level was consistently reduced to the point where a surplus was recorded in 2018-19. This was achieved through a disciplined focus on reining in government spending, expertly led by former finance minister Mathias Cormann.</para>
<para>In early 2020 COVID hit, and extraordinary measures were put in place—they had to be. Without JobKeeper, Australia would have experienced unemployment and social dislocation unseen since the Great Depression. JobKeeper worked, and we came out of the pandemic in a better position than virtually any other nation on earth. The pandemic has eroded the finances of the developed world, leading to debt levels that have no precedent in modern history other than during the Second World War. In the United States, the UK and France, central government debt is bigger than the size of the entire economy at more than 100 per cent of GDP. In the world's third largest economy, Japan, central government debt is more than 200 per cent of GDP.</para>
<para>The risks posed by high debt aren't academic. Many nations have been pulverised by the impact of debt, including some formerly great economies. Even the biggest economies in the world have limits to how much they can borrow. The recent reaction to the UK mini budget is instructive. Debt markets severely marked down the UK economy, sending the price of borrowing up for both the government and homeowners. In effect, the market was saying, 'Enough debt,' forcing the hand of the UK government. This is not a good place to be, as it places too much power in the hands of debt holders relative to the sovereign government. We must never allow that to happen here.</para>
<para>On our side of the House, we feel this issue in our bones. Many of us have run businesses, and we know that too much debt is a dangerously bad thing. But the Labor Party doesn't understand that. During COVID, they wanted to spend far more than the coalition. They wanted to extend the JobKeeper program and they wanted to pay people to get vaccinated, amongst other things. All up, their COVID-era policies would have seen Australia's debt increase by $80 billion. Since coming to government, Labor's own budget papers say that its decisions will increase deficits and debt. Three years from now, its election commitments and other priorities will make the deficit $6 billion worse than it would otherwise have been—it's on page 78 of budget paper 1. We can't see what happens after that because the forecasts don't go that far, but we can be sure it will be even more.</para>
<para>As Liberals, we are instinctively opposed to charging Australians more to pay for the cost of government, but it is very clear that this is where the government is headed through its national conversation on the budget. A good national conversation for the government would be, 'So far, our decisions have increased debt and deficit, but we're going to change that to reduce our debt levels with a sensible approach to spending.' But the real national conversation is going to be, 'We the government have increased debt and deficit, and our spending plans are going to increase it by much more, so you're going to have to pay more to us in tax.' We don't need a tax. We need sensible budget management, something the coalition has always provided and that Labor fails on every time. This issue always matters, but in unsettled times it matters even more.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Victoria: Floods</title>
          <page.no>100</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:44</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr MULINO</name>
    <name.id>132880</name.id>
    <electorate>Fraser</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to speak about the floods that have recently impacted so much of Australia's east coast. These floods have impacted both urban and regional areas right up and down Australia's east coast, but I want to focus today on the impact that they've had on my electorate and the community that I live in. I want to speak in particular about the way in which these floods have disrupted the lives and businesses of thousands of people in my electorate. They've affected suburbs such as Sunshine, Footscray, Ascot Vale, Keilor—suburbs in the heart of my electorate or bordering my electorate.</para>
<para>I want to speak in particular about the people who live in the suburb of Maribyrnong, a suburb where dozens of families are still unable to return to their homes. There has been no more confronting experience that I have lived through as an MP than walking through that suburb in the days after those floods, seeing street after street where all of their furniture, all of their possessions that defined their lives were out on their front lawns. To see the lives of families, individuals, children impacted so dramatically; to see children unable to return to school; to see small businesses unable to operate—some of these families may not be able to return to their homes for three or six months, or even longer.</para>
<para>I spoke to one father who, because of the speed with which the water rose, ended up on the roof of his house with his wife and their four children. Their plight was captured by the helicopter of the local news station. They were rescued by a boat. Their story was told very eloquently by his youngest daughter, eight years old, to the news live on camera that night. She told of the incredible relief that she felt being plucked off the roof and taken to land nearby. There are so many other stories just like that, of families who were in harm's way. Fortunately, at least in the community that I represent, nobody has suffered serious injury, but so many people were, as I said, in harm's way.</para>
<para>What struck me was the resilience of individuals, the resilience of families and the resilience of that community, but also the community spirit—neighbours helping each other. Again, there were so many stories, stories of the SES doorknocking the night before and of neighbours looking out for each other. There was the story of an elderly woman who was brought to the community centre, to safety the next morning, by her neighbours who had checked in on her multiple times the night before. There was the story of another elderly person who had decided to stay in their home, knowing the patterns of the river, having lived in that house for decades, but whose neighbours brought her a pair of gumboots, so that she would be better placed to survive the perilous 24 hours that were ahead.</para>
<para>In the days following, volunteers from neighbouring suburbs descended on that suburb in their hundreds to help people manage the incredibly difficult task, physically and emotionally, of clearing out their houses, not only of their possessions but of carpet and of fixtures. It was an extremely difficult few days.</para>
<para>Then walking around that suburb in the days after the flooding I saw people driving from across town, people driving from dozens of kilometres away, to drop off bags of groceries to people who had been the most affected.</para>
<para>I want to acknowledge the work of so many volunteers: the SES, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army and the local businesses who donated clothes and toys for children. It really was an all-in effort. Government did its bit. I want to acknowledge the local council who set up a resources hub at the Maribyrnong Community Centre the next day, which so many people took refuge in. They also did their best with cleaning up all of the mud across so many streets and doing hard rubbish collections across so many areas.</para>
<para>Federal and state governments chipped in with emergency payments that I think help many people but, of course, I do want to acknowledge that there is so much more left to do: the longer term project of helping people manage their insurance, the longer term project of providing individuals and families with mental health support. I also want to acknowledge that there are some concerns in the community, and I want to help people manage any ongoing concerns that they have.</para>
<para>This has been an incredible process. The community stood up for each other. I want to say to people that my thoughts are with those still affected, and me and my office are here to help you with any ongoing concerns.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bradfield Electorate: Di Girolamo, Mr Nick</title>
          <page.no>101</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:49</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to relate the story of a Bradfield constituent which I believe highlights the danger that anticorruption bodies can present in tainting the reputations and damaging the lives of innocent people. Of course the coalition fully supports a Commonwealth anticorruption commission, but it is important that there are appropriate procedural safeguards so that people do not become collateral damage.</para>
<para>My constituent Nick Di Girolamo was a successful lawyer and businessmen and a respected leader in the Italian-Australian community. His world was turned upside down when he was accused by the Independent Commission Against Corruption in New South Wales of fraud in 2014. ICAC subjected Mr Di Girolamo to public slurs and humiliations in full view of a voracious media. A particularly damaging allegation was that, as CEO of Australian Water Holdings, Mr Di Girolamo had acted fraudulently by seeking reimbursement from Sydney Water for $76,000 of Liberal Party donations. Mr Di Girolamo's act of sending a gift of wine to the then New South Wales Premier Barry O'Farrell attracted great focus from ICAC and intense media interest.</para>
<para>In 2017 ICAC ultimately cleared Mr Di Girolamo of allegations it made of him. But this was several years after the accusations were made, in the full glare of publicity. Over those several years Mr Di Girolamo faced repeated cross-examinations, negative media coverage and great family stress. He even received death threats. Once he was hauled before ICAC, Counsel Assisting, Geoffrey Watson, fed the hysteria by labelling Mr Di Girolamo a 'shyster'. This was deeply regrettable and inappropriate conduct by Mr Watson, but of course he has never provided an apology. In Mr Di Girolamo's words:</para>
<quote><para class="block">When counsel assisting opened I was belittled and I was humiliated by the severity of the allegations.</para></quote>
<para>And:</para>
<quote><para class="block">They cut me to the core. It was truly harrowing as I knew the allegations were wrong. It's an environment where you're not innocent until proven guilty. If you're there, the reporting is such that you're already guilty.</para></quote>
<para>For Mr Di Girolamo, the result of being called before ICAC was to be shunned by colleagues, friends and business associates. His income collapsed.</para>
<para>Since having the unfair allegations against him dropped by ICAC, Mr Di Girolamo has sought to get his life back on track and now runs his own legal practice. But being cleared of wrongdoing by ICAC does not erase one's association with it. Google search results and online news articles don't disappear. Mr Di Girolamo has sought to present his cautionary tale to the parliament through a submission to the committee inquiring into the national anticorruption commission legislation. Troublingly, the committee has declined to publish his submission, which leads me to wonder how many other submissions highlighting some of the negative consequences of current design features of state anticorruption commissions have similarly been suppressed by the committee, with the Labor majority presumably following direction from the Attorney-General.</para>
<para>Mr Di Girolamo has authorised me to refer to his submission and to quote from it. In his submission he makes it clear that he supports the establishment of a Commonwealth anticorruption commission but that it is very important that the rules under which it operates are carefully designed. Both the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General have recently stated that the national anticorruption commission has been modelled on the New South Wales Independent Commission Against Corruption. Mr Di Girolamo—rightly, in my view—raises his personal experiences, highlighting matters that properly need to be balanced up in considering the rules under which the national anticorruption commission will operate. In his submission he argues that changes should be made to the government's NACC legislation, such as creating the ability for commissioners to declare the innocence of people of interest at any time during proceedings. This is worth considering.</para>
<para>Let me relay one of the most painful experiences Mr Di Girolamo and his family were forced to endure. He says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">As I walked into the inquiry on the first day, someone yelled out, 'Suicide is an option, Nick.'</para></quote>
<para>Mr Di Girolamo goes on to say in this submission—the one that the committee has not seen fit to publish—that:</para>
<quote><para class="block">There's something about the way the commission has operated that's conducive to people behaving so abhorrently.</para></quote>
<para>I urge the government to heed the experiences of Mr Di Girolamo and other witnesses who have been called before state anticorruption commissions around the country. Sadly, there are too many instances of reputations and livelihoods destroyed, often leading to significant mental trauma and in some cases to suicide. I call on the Joint Select Committee on National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation to examine Mr Di Girolamo's experiences in making its recommendations on amendments to the bill.</para>
<para>The presumption of innocence has been part of the golden thread of justice in Commonwealth countries for many centuries for very good reason. It is supported by the rules of evidence and many other procedural safeguards. We may well reflect that reputation, which Shakespeare called the immortal part of oneself, is not easily restored once lost, particularly when unjustly lost. These important principles of justice should not be lightly sacrificed. I urge the government and my fellow parliamentarians to consider these matters very carefully.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Blair Electorate: Infrastructure</title>
          <page.no>102</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Ipswich is one of the fastest-growing regions in the country, so we need to invest in local jobs, infrastructure and services to meet out current and future needs. To that end the federal budget contained tens of million dollars in funding for infrastructure, industry, flood resilience projects, health and veteran services, and community and sporting facilities. Within that there is a focus on long-term infrastructure to support our growing population as well as some more immediate flood recovery and resilience projects. Firstly, there is support for a high-priority transport infrastructure project to support our growing city, and that is the last section of the Ipswich Motorway. There's $12.5 million for planning works for the final stage from the Oxley roundabout through to what we used to call the Centenary interchange. I know you and I, Speaker, as the member for Oxley, have advocated for a long time on the Ipswich Motorway. This is money that has been requested for planning purposes by the Queensland Labor government, and I'm sure that Annastacia Palaszczuk and Mark Bailey, the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, and the Deputy Premier with responsibility for state projects, Steven Miles, will be supportive of that money going towards Queensland government projects. That final stage of the Ipswich Motorway, on which 100,000 vehicles a day travel between Ipswich and Brisbane, is absolutely crucial for the electorates of Blair and Oxley and surrounds as well.</para>
<para>There's $3.4 million to complete a detailed business case for the Ipswich to Springfield rail line. This has been requested by the Ipswich City Council and also by Springfield City Group, along with many people and organisations such as the chambers of commerce in Springfield and Ipswich. Once the rail link is completed, it will link the suburbs between Springfield, Redbank Plains, Ripley and Yamanto, which account for 70 per cent of the growth in Ipswich, where the population will grow from just under 250,000 now to about 550,000 in the next two to three decades, and 70 per cent of that growth will be in that southern corridor. This is important funding, and I know the Ipswich City Council is undertaking an options analysis that's only just started. This is above the $2 million we committed and it is part, of course, of the city deal that the Ipswich City Council negotiated with the former government.</para>
<para>We're delivering and we have delivered $3.4 million. I know that the Ipswich City Council has considered that it will cost about $10 million to plan the business case, and you and I, Mr Speaker, have advocated for that rail link for a very long time. It's important for our constituents as well. We saw just how many people have come to Springfield as a result of the linking of the railway to Springfield Central which, by the way, is the home of the Brisbane Lions. I look forward to the Brisbane Lions being able to play football there and I would urge the AFL to think about the grand final of the AFLW being located at Springfield. That would be a terrific venue for the grand final of the AFLW.</para>
<para>But there's also money in the budget—I think, critical money—to upgrade the Ipswich Showgrounds. This is the main evacuation location for Ipswich. I have been critical of Ipswich City Council—and I've said this to the mayor—because there should have been more evacuation hubs at places like Goodna and Rosewood and Karalee and elsewhere. But the $4 million we're giving to the Ipswich Show Society is crucial, with $1.5 million of that being under our Disaster Ready Fund. The previous government not having used the Emergency Response Fund, we're going to put $200 million a year towards projects like this. I look forward to that money going to the Ipswich Show Society. This will be important for flood resilience and recovery.</para>
<para>I'm working with the state LNP state member for Moggill and the LNP councillor for Pullenvale. I'm urging the federal government to think about allocating money for a similar type of project for Mount Crosby State School because the people of Mount Crosby currently get cut off every time there's a big flood. Even though they're in Brisbane, they are isolated. They're my constituents, and I think that is crucial. The $3 million we provide to the Ipswich City Council will be towards the Bremer River and tributaries under our urban rivers program. That's crucial in terms of flood recovery and resilience, water quality and environmental values in our urban waterways. There are important creeks that go into the Brisbane and Bremer rivers, like Woogaroo Creek and Bundamba Creek, so we'll work with the Ipswich City Council to put $1 million towards this particular project as well. But this is absolutely crucial. We haven't even got flood gauges in some of these places, so I am very pleased to see the support of this government for the people of Ipswich.</para>
<para>House adjourned at 20:0 0</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>NOTICES</title>
        <page.no>103</page.no>
        <type>NOTICES</type>
      </debateinfo></debate>
  </chamber.xscript>
  <fedchamb.xscript>
    <business.start>
      <body background="" style="" xmlns:w="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/wordprocessingml/2006/main" xmlns:a="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/main" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:WX="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/word/2003/auxHint" xmlns:aml="http://schemas.microsoft.com/aml/2001/core" xmlns:pic="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/picture" xmlns:w10="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:wp="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/drawingml/2006/wordprocessingDrawing" xmlns:r="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/relationships">
        <p class="HPS-MCJobDate" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-MCJobDate">
            <a href="Federation Chamber" type="">Monday, 7 November 2022</a>
          </span>
        </p>
        <p class="HPS-Normal" style="direction:ltr;unicode-bidi:normal;">
          <span class="HPS-Normal">
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">The </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">DEPUTY SPEAKER </span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">(</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">Ms Claydon</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">)</span>
            <span style="font-weight:bold;">
            </span>took the chair at 10:30.</span>
        </p>
      </body>
    </business.start>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</title>
        <page.no>106</page.no>
        <type>CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Toondah Harbour, Brisbane Airport</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:30</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr CHANDLER-MATHER</name>
    <name.id>300121</name.id>
    <electorate>Griffith</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Toondah Harbour in Cleveland, Queensland, is home to one of the most significant wetlands in Australia. It is internationally recognised as a Ramsar site under the Ramsar Convention, an international treaty which Australia is a signatory to. It is home to thousands of migratory birds, many of which are vulnerable and critically endangered species, like the Eastern Curlew, and it provides crucial habitat for turtles and other marine life.</para>
<para>Many people would be shocked to learn that a property developer, Walker Corporation, wants to destroy the wetland for a massive luxury development. People would perhaps be even more shocked to learn that, at multiple stages, both the state and federal governments have approved of this incredibly destructive development, allowing it to progress along the approval pipeline. Walker Corporation wants to dredge half a million cubic metres of the precious bay and destroy 37 hectares of seagrass and 3.4 hectares of mangroves. It's abundantly clear that this development should never have gotten this far. Indeed, the federal department of the environment agreed, saying all the way back in 2016 that the proposal was 'clearly unacceptable'.</para>
<para>What's more, under otherwise incredibly weak environmental laws, the environment minister can't approve developments on Ramsar listed wetlands, and the only way Ramsar boundaries can be deleted or restricted is if there is an urgent national interest. Despite this, Walker Cooperation is perilously close to having approval to bulldoze one of the most precious wetlands in Australia. Why are we here? Maybe it's the $1.4 million in donations Walker Corporation has made to the Liberal, National and Labor parties across Australia since 2007. Now, the federal environment minister will face a stark choice, and the community's message could not be more clear: reject this destructive development and finally put an end to a saga that has come unacceptably close to destroying an incredibly important wetland.</para>
<para>Recently, Airservices Australia revealed something shocking: Brisbane Airport has had more noise complaints than all other airports in Australia combined. This is clearly a sign of the massive institutional failure of Airservices Australia and the federal government to properly regulate flight noise. We have flights screeching over people's houses at 2.30 in the morning at unacceptably regular intervals, exposing people to damaging noise pollution. We know that it has a huge impact on people's health.</para>
<para>All that we're asking for are the three things that Sydney Airport already has: a cap on flights, a curfew and a long-term operating plan that will see more flights over the bay. If it's good enough for Sydney residents, then it should be good enough for Brisbane residents. At a community strategy meeting we had in September, we clearly discussed our demands that we will be making on the government. We've got a private member's bill that has been before parliament before, and we'll be bringing it again to introduce those three demands. If the federal government doesn't listen to us, the community has agreed that, going into next year, there will be larger and larger protest actions.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Moreton Electorate: African Village</title>
          <page.no>106</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A few weeks ago, I attended the opening of a new building called the African Village. Situated in Moorooka, it's the result of the work of the Queensland African Communities Council and their hardworking president, Beny Bol OAM. Beny has a long history of working with young people and is committed to making sure that African Australian youth get every opportunity in life and are not overrepresented in the criminal justice system. Beny arrived in Australia in 2007 and in that time has acquired two master's degrees, has written a book and has been awarded an OAM for his service to youth. Moorooka has always been a familiar home to the African diaspora, especially those early arrivals from South Sudan, Somalia and Ethiopia who arrived during the early and mid-2000s. In Queensland, many new arrivals settled around Moorooka, where the department of immigration arranged housing and support services. Moorooka is a great suburb, and it's where I live.</para>
<para>The opening of the African Village in Moorooka is of great cultural and social significance for many Queenslanders from an African background, especially young people. The aim of this unique space is for the centre to become a community hub for people of all ages, but especially young people. It's a place where they can drop in to relax in a safe place, play a bit of sport or get their homework support after school, sitting on some of the furniture donated by Martin College via my niece, Tricia Kallquist. Thanks to my favourite goddaughter for arranging that.</para>
<para>As Benny explained at the opening of the African Village, for several years now we've observed our children struggling to find their place within their families, communities and schools. So the Queensland African Communities Council designed a youth early intervention strategy—the African villages at Moorooka, Redbank Plains and Geebung are part of that strategy. The centres are modelled around the concept of: 'It takes a village to raise a child.'</para>
<para>At each village, African youth mentors organise locally designed and structured activities to support individual young people, families and schools to make sure that those at risk of becoming disengaged are supported at an early stage. The mentors work closely with students' career experts, parents and teachers to ensure communication is consistent and that expectations are managed and aligned to the students' needs and interests. There are also opportunities for young people to learn traditional dance and to do African language classes. These classes are an important step for young people to reconnect with their cultural heritage, especially in cases where young people are struggling with the concept of cultural identity.</para>
<para>What the Queensland African Communities Council wants to see is a resilient and relatively integrated future generation of the African community in Queensland—and Australia as a whole. The African Village in Moorooka is a great example of making sure all community members are supported to connect, to contribute and to belong.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Defence Personnel</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOLAHAN</name>
    <name.id>235654</name.id>
    <electorate>Menzies</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Last Friday, I had the pleasure of joining the member for Hughes at Holsworthy Barracks in Sydney to witness a special event. Over two ceremonies, newly qualified officers and soldiers of the Specials Operations Engineer Regiment and the two commando regiments were each presented with their berets. This was the culmination of a long and arduous journey.</para>
<para>I will begin with the Special Operations Engineer Regiment, otherwise known as SOER. There are countless Afghanistan veterans who, but for the bravery and competence of engineers from SOER, would not be here. I know that in my platoon they found 21 IEDs that we would have otherwise driven on or walked on. When others had to freeze and back up, their job was to lie down and crawl towards the danger. These new members of SOER are signing up to the same explosive danger and more. The increased threat of large-state conflict has meant their unique skills and training—including in nuclear, chemical and biological warfare—may be called upon. Congratulations and thank you.</para>
<para>The next ceremony was the presentation of the green beret to newly qualified members of the 1st and 2nd commando regiments. This marked the culmination of 18 months of training, which commenced with a brutal three-week selection course. The candidates were assessed on a number of attributes, including their teamwork, intellect, resilience, integrity and ethics. For many, this has been a longer journey than 18 months from the initial decision to tell a close friend or your mum or your dad that you might even try, through to the months spent training like an athlete to be ready. Quite a few had spent additional years overcoming disappointment or injury. Yet they came back again and again, and that speaks volumes for their resilience and determination to be there. Their unique on-target and insertion skills may be called upon, and I congratulate and thank them for their achievement.</para>
<para>To the directing staff who planned, organised and executed course after course, this is as much a burden on them and their families. They go through this 18-month process and are away again and again. They then back it up with another reinforcement cycle. To the members of the Defence Special Operations Training and Education Centre: thank you.</para>
<para>Finally, to the families who witnessed the ceremony last Friday: your sons and daughters have been through a journey few have been on. You have had a front-row seat witnessing how much this meant to them and how much they sacrificed to be there. Yet this is only the start. I want you to know that, through the representatives of this parliament, that service and sacrifice will never be forgotten. Thank you for letting me be a witness to this ceremony.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Budget</title>
          <page.no>107</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:39</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr NEUMANN</name>
    <name.id>HVO</name.id>
    <electorate>Blair</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The federal budget is kicking goals in Blair. Ipswich people love their sports, and I'm proud to have secured tens of millions of dollars in funding both elite and grassroots sporting facilities across the city in the budget. We want to see more locals, especially young kids, getting active and participating in sport. Ipswich is one of the fastest growing regions in the country, so it's vital to invest in our community and social infrastructure to promote healthy lifestyles. There's a huge demand for sporting facilities in our city, and the upgrades like the ones in the budget will help meet demand and support the growing popularity of many sports.</para>
<para>The North Ipswich Reserve funding is about investing in a state-of-the-art facility so we can hold elite level football games in Ipswich. Ipswich is also a sporting nursery. We want to develop the next generation of sporting champions like Alfie Langer, Ash Barty and Ali Brigginshaw, who's currently playing overseas in the UK, trying to win the World Cup for our women's rugby league team.</para>
<para>With the Olympics being held in South-East Queensland in the next decade, we want Ipswich to get a slice of the action and secure some events or have teams use Ipswich facilities for training. That's where the new Brisbane Lions Springfield stadium in the Brighton Homes Arena could play a role. I'm really excited about the $20 million committed to upgrade the North Ipswich Reserve stadium. This is the first stage in developing the North Ipswich sport and entertainment precinct in a boutique 12½-thousand-seat stadium with broadcast facilities to ensure that NRL and A-league matches could possibly be played in that region. I'm very disappointed in the NRL and the A-league for not supporting the Jets and the Western Pride bids for licences in this area. This will help set us up with the kind of stadium that we need. I've been championing this marquee project for several years. I know it's a real game changer for our city.</para>
<para>What's also really important is the $2 million to expand the Ipswich basketball stadium, JBS Arena, at Booval. This meets the growing popularity of the sport. There has been a 50 per cent increase in participation, particularly by women and girls, in basketball in Ipswich in the last 18 months. This $2 million will provide a total of five courts for club competition purposes and four suitable for representative competitions.</para>
<para>There's $1 million to upgrade facilities at Ironbark Park to support the fast-growing Ripley Valley Football Club. This will help with the construction of a canteen, kitchen, change rooms and modern amenities for the South Ripley playing fields.</para>
<para>I'm really pleased about half a million dollars to provide the Ipswich Hockey Association with much needed upgrades for the hockey grounds, including tower lighting, automatic irrigation and field reconfiguration. I think this is so important because it sends a message to Ipswich City Council: don't ever treat the Ipswich Hockey Association in the way they were treated in the past. I thank them for their commitment and for working with me.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Kidney Health Australia, La Trobe Electorate: St Luke's Anglican Church</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOOD</name>
    <name.id>E0F</name.id>
    <electorate>La Trobe</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak about the need for all of us to be aware of Kidney Health Australia and the great work they do. I recently met with a constituent from Gembrook, Liz Hoffman, and her beloved Doberman, Buffy, in my electorate of La Trobe. Liz is an ambassador for Kidney Health Australia and has raised funds throughout October for the Red Socks Run campaign to increase awareness and support research into kidney disease. Liz has reached the goal of completing 450 kilometres of walking with Buffy.</para>
<para>Kidney disease is a silent, incurable illness. 27,000 people in Australia are living with kidney failure and require dialysis or a transplant to stay alive, but there is very little research into the disease, especially in the early stages. Ninety per cent of kidney functions can be lost before any symptoms are apparent. On average, 63 Australians will die every day. Every day, 63 Australians die from kidney related diseases, and, sadly, there is no cure for it. A blood test can assess kidney health and see how well your kidneys are filtering your blood.</para>
<para>This October, Kidney Health Australia's Red Socks Run campaign will fund life-changing treatments and vital support services for those living with the disease. Congratulations to Liz and Buffy on reaching the goal of walking 450 kilometres in the beautiful Dandenong Ranges in my electorate.</para>
<para>I would also like to make the House aware of the great work done by Saint Luke's Anglican Church. I'd like to acknowledge a volunteer, not-for-profit organisation in the electorate of Latrobe. I have met with the Food Store at Saint Luke's Church in Cockatoo recently and on a number of other occasions. The food store was established three years ago in 2019 by Julia, David and Graham, who saw the need in the community, stepped up to help and have not stopped since. The food store is a food bank located at Saint Luke's Anglican Church in Cockatoo offering free food and a kind ear for those in need of a little extra help. It operates from the church every Monday from 10 am to 2 pm. All locals are welcome to visit and collect free food.</para>
<para>Visitors receive a friendly welcome, a warm smile and a hot cup of tea, which I had. Visitors attend the food store from across the Dandenong Ranges, including the suburbs of Cockatoo, Gembrook, Emerald and even out to Healesville, Pakenham and Narre Warren. The food store is generously supplied groceries by Foodbank Victoria and local businesses to enable this wonderful service to function.</para>
<para>St Luke's Anglican Church are also seeking to upgrade their bathroom onsite to provide hot showers to locals doing it tough. I'm right behind this project and, again, congratulate Julia, David and all their team and thank them very much for everything they do. They're located at 1 McBride Street, Cockatoo and open Mondays between 10 am and 2 pm.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Lawrey, Mr Ian, OAM, Keeley's Cause</title>
          <page.no>108</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise today to recognise and commend Melton local Mr Ian Lawrey OAM, who has recently been awarded an RSL Australia life membership. I recently attended the Vietnam veterans remembrance service in Melton to commemorate Vietnam Veterans Day, and I was honoured to be present as this prestigious honour was bestowed upon Mr Lawrey.</para>
<para>A veteran of the Vietnam conflict, Mr Lawrey has been a driving force within the Melton RSL. Over years of service, Mr Lawrey has worked incredibly hard to help many, particularly young people, to understand the importance of commemoration. The Anzac Day parade in Melton is unrivalled. There is always a sea of schoolchildren standing shoulder to shoulder, all with a deep understanding of why they're there and why it's so important. This is a credit to Mr Lawrey's work in our community, building strong ties with a range of agencies, support groups, schools and governments.</para>
<para>Melton is also home to a dedicated memorial to the Vietnam War, also a result of Mr Lawrey's hard work and persistence. There is a long list of achievements attributed to Mr Lawrey and his work in our community. I want Mr Lawrey to know that those of us who are fortunate enough to know him are immensely proud of what he has achieved, and there could be no more worthy a recipient of this honour.</para>
<para>I recently had the honour of joining local charity Keeley's Cause as they distributed iPads as part of their iPads for children with autism or an intellectual disability program. Keeley's Cause was founded by Keeley Johnson, a young woman from my hometown of Ballan. Keeley founded the charity when she was just 13 years old, after being diagnosed with autism and an intellectual disability. Keeley's Cause has an important mission: to ensure that all children diagnosed with autism or an intellectual disability have the technology they need to ensure that they aren't left behind at school and through their other educational and therapeutic pursuits.</para>
<para>On Thursday last week I joined Keeley; her mum, Sharon; and a wonderful group of local families at the Melton Valley Golf Club as they were presented with iPads of their own. This took the total number distributed under this program to 332 iPads. This is an amazing effort from an incredible young woman. What's more, once these iPads are distributed to the children in this program, they then develop an ongoing relationship with the Keeley's Cause organisation. Their technology is updated at regular intervals, and they are given additional support to ensure that they can achieve to the best of their abilities through their educational pursuits.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Longman Electorate: Scouts Australia</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:48</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr YOUNG</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
    <electorate>Longman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There are over 40 million scouts worldwide. In my electorate of Longman there are six scout groups: Caboolture, Morayfield, Burpengary, Narangba, Woodford and Bribie Island. I'm a proud supporter of Scouts because their values are part of bringing up good, outstanding citizens, which benefits all of us.</para>
<para>Some of the attributes that scouts focus on are the importance of community involvement, self-confidence, accepting challenges, environmental issues, initiative and problem solving, honouring reward for effort by achieving badges and awards, leadership, planning and being prepared, independence, keeping things fun, taking risks and teamwork.</para>
<para>For the venturer who's up for an extra challenge, the Queen's Scout Award is the highest award in the venturer scout section and carries an outstanding reputation within scouting and the community. I think it will be called the King's Scout Award, moving forward. To gain the Queen's Scout award, the venturer must first achieve a venturer award standard in all 13 venturer award activities. They must then reach the Queen's Scout award standard in an activity area from each of leadership development, which includes outdoor activities, personal growth and community involvement. The Queen Scout award aims to widen the interests and knowledge of venturer scouts, and encourage them to look wide. The award is designed to be challenging and encouraging for venturing scouts over a wide range of activities. To achieve this prodigious award, a venturer scout must be able to set a goal, plan progress towards that goal, organise themselves and others, and maintain a determination to overcome difficulties and complete a task. Completion of the Queen Scout award is a major milestone in a venturer scout's journey and carries an outstanding reputation. The award is approved by a venturer scout's peer at unit council level. This peer review aims to maintain good standards for the award and allow the venturer scout's efforts to be judged by those who understand their abilities and goals the best.</para>
<para>Recently, I was pleased to attend the ceremony of Longman's latest recipient of the Queen Scout award, Alexander Bromley. I have known Alexander Bromley for a few years now and have watched him develop into a fine young man. I congratulate him and his proud parents, who were in attendance on this special day, David and Helen. I encourage anyone out there who has children who may have lost their way or who are looking for direction to join a Scout group, because the values and principles they will learn will hold them in good stead for the rest of their life.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hunter Electorate: Budget</title>
          <page.no>109</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPAC</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>HOLI () (): The Albanese Labor government handed down its first budget, and I am pleased to say it is a great budget for the people of the Hunter electorate, who were neglected for so long under the former government. This is a budget that invests in what Australians need to build a better future. It is a great budget for families and a great budget for our nation. There is a lot in the budget for the people of the Hunter such as investment in infrastructure projects and many other items that will benefit the Hunter. Childcare costs are a huge issue for families and our cheaper childcare policy will see 6,300 families in the Hunter electorate better off. We will also extend paid parental leave, giving more time to families at that important time of life when they are welcoming a new baby. The people of the Hunter electorate can also expect to see cheaper medicines, which will save them up to $450 per year and help with the cost of living.</para>
<para>I was elected to be a strong voice for the Hunter, and the government has certainly heard me. This budget delivers over $400 million for all of our election commitments across the Hunter. The Muswellbrook bypass is a big-ticket item, along with money for the Muswellbrook town centre, Muswellbrook Olympic Park upgrade and Muswellbrook preschool and playgroup. Singleton Council will receive an upgrade for the Alroy oval precinct, the Singleton Bulls club amenities fit out and women's changerooms. Cessnock Council received money for the Cessnock regional skate park, the BMX facility upgrade at Carmichael Park and the Cessnock Goanna's lighting upgrade. Lake Macquarie Council received funding for Mandalong Road upgrade, money for a dredge in Lake Macquarie and a grouting fund, money for Mums' Cottage, funding for the urban rivers project and for the north-west Lake Macquarie catalyst area, and funding for Edgeworth Eagles fencing and lighting.</para>
<para>We will be delivering an urgent Medicare care clinic for Cessnock. This is really important, as the Hunter has some of the lowest rates of bulk billing in the country. There is also money for the GP after-hours access clinic at Toronto to have its services restored after the previous government slashed it. This will help to take the pressure off the hospitals and is a really important announcement for Hunter. We have 967 new university placements for the Hunter at the University of Newcastle, Along with the fee-free TAFE commitments, this will make education more accessible for many in the Hunter electorate.</para>
<para>It is great to have a government that delivers on its promises and invests in the future of the Hunter. This is critically important not just for the people of the Hunter but for the whole nation.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Bass Electorate: Migrant Resource Centre</title>
          <page.no>110</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:54</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs ARCHER</name>
    <name.id>282237</name.id>
    <electorate>Bass</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Today I would like to wish the happiest of birthdays to a local northern Tasmanian organisation which has been at the centre of supporting our region's migrant population for 40 years. The Migrant Resource Centre began in 1982 with the aim of providing access to services to help newcomers settle into Launceston and surrounding areas, and to create awareness in the broader community about the challenges that new arrivals face. While the organisation has grown and thrived, particularly in recent years under the leadership of CEO Ella Dixon and a passionate board, this mission has not changed. MRC has grown from a micro not-for-profit with just one paid employee to an organisation employing over 40 people, including many migrants who once received assistance.</para>
<para>To be celebrating a milestone birthday is also to reflect on the road taken. As Ella said recently, MRC's first few years were lean and every victory was hard-fought, but challenges were overcome and partnerships were forged that made new opportunities possible. The founding members and the chairs and committee members that came after them have never given up. This determination is what has allowed the organisation to thrive year after year decade after decade and has led to 40 years of successful migrant support services in Tasmania.</para>
<para>From introducing Harmony Day more than 20 years ago to starting up multicultural programs at City Park Radio and becoming one of the first multicultural specific NDIS providers to launch in Tasmania, MRC has continued to identify, develop and implement key programs and services that continue to build a stronger and more inclusive multicultural Northern Tasmanian community. In fact, it was the tremendous work undertaken by MRC to successfully resettle the first Bhutanese families to arrive under Australia's humanitarian program that led to Launceston being chosen to have a pilot program for settling Afghan Hazara refugees in regional Australia.</para>
<para>Over the past 3½ years I've had the enormous privilege of building relationships with the Chin, Afghan Hazara, Nepali and many other migrant communities in the area. While there are of course challenges that exist with resettlement, there are many wonderful stories of jobs secured, new skills gained, businesses started, sporting teams created and houses purchased by migrants who now call our region home.</para>
<para>It would be remiss of me not to mention the challenges to the Humanitarian Settlement Program over the past few years that have created needless issues and headaches for MRC as they worked to provide the necessary supports for refugees arriving in Northern Tasmania. Although there's not enough time to delve into the detail today, I'm committed to advocating for the necessary changes. I thank Minister Giles for his engagement with me on this issue.</para>
<para>Thank you, MRC, and happy 40th birthday.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Health Care</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>10:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms RISHWORTH</name>
    <name.id>HWA</name.id>
    <electorate>Kingston</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Labor budget that was just handed down starts the repair work of our Medicare and primary health system. The primary health and Medicare system was really neglected in the former government's reign, so I'm really pleased that in this first budget we are taking steps to repair our primary healthcare system. The big issues that many people in my electorate raise on a regular basis include access to see a GP, access to the local hospital, access to cheaper medicines and access to the right health care when they need it. I am so pleased to communicate with my electorate the big investments Labor is making to strengthen Medicare and get primary health care back on track.</para>
<para>We've already started delivering our Strengthening Medicare Taskforce. This task force is a diverse group of health experts and consumer representatives who will provide advice to help the government fix our healthcare system. The goals of the task force are to improve patient access to general practice, including after-hours care; to improve patient access to nursing and allied health services; to increase affordability; to have better management of complex cases; and to decrease the pressure on our hospital system. The work of the task force will be implemented through a $750 million investment to deliver the highest priority reforms to Medicare. This has been welcomed by people in my electorate, who have been crying out for some action to strengthen Medicare.</para>
<para>One of the big commitments in this budget was an urgent care clinic for the southern suburbs of Adelaide—something very much needed by so many people in my electorate. It's really a commonsense idea. If you don't need to go to a tertiary hospital, where can you go to get broken bones mended and other care you might not otherwise be able to access from a GP?</para>
<para>Of course, there was the $200 million for the expansion of Flinders Medical Centre—the medical centre in which I was born. This is a good investment for our local community. It will be matched by $200 million from the state government. It's a very critical institution that desperately needs this investment, which will go to servicing so many people in my electorate. The new investment will include money for 136 extra beds and expansion of the intensive care unit, new modern operating theatres, upgraded imaging technology and a brand-new eye-surgery clinic.</para>
<para>This government is investing in healthcare, and it will benefit my community.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>111</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Global Methane Pledge</title>
          <page.no>111</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAMILTON</name>
    <name.id>291387</name.id>
    <electorate>Groom</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the Government has signed Australia up to the Global Methane Pledge despite promising the Australian public that it would not sign the pledge during the 2022 election;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) this is a broken election promise;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the Global Methane Pledge includes a target to reduce methane emissions by 30 per cent on 2020 levels by 2030;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) 48 per cent of Australia's annual methane emissions come from the agricultural sector, where no affordable, practical and large-scale way exists to reduce it other than culling herd sizes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) in the previous Government, the Coalition invested over $18 million to monitor and reduce fugitive methane emissions in the energy and resources sector, and help farmers reduce emissions from livestock; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) this pledge, in effect, creates a cap on the size of Australia's livestock industry;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) further notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) international research shows the target cannot be realised without taking behavioural and technical measures in the livestock agriculture sector, and recommends people change their diets resulting in lower meat and dairy consumption, leading to a capping or reduction of the national livestock herd;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) this will increase the price of a steak at your favourite restaurant or butcher, or a white coffee at your favourite cafe, at a time when small businesses are already struggling with mounting cost-of-doing-business pressures; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) this pledge equally calls to reduce methane emissions from the gas sector—a critical fuel source that complements the increasing share of renewables in our electricity grid—which adds pressure to production and generation and is an invitation for the type of chaos we are seeing in Europe at the moment; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) install financial protections for Australia's agricultural sector which will be impacted by the Global Methane Pledge;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) provide assurances to Australia's agricultural sector that there will be no new taxes and regulation to deliver the Government's methane emissions reduction target; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) provide assurances the national livestock herd will not be capped or reduced as a consequence of the Government's methane emissions reduction target.</para></quote>
<para>The government has signed this country up for the Global Methane Pledge and, in doing so, has inadvertently put a cap on our cattle industry—an unintended consequence of an ill-thought-through action. We've sacrificed the growth of our agricultural sector, the prosperity of regional economies and basic market freedoms so that the government can receive a pat on the back, from countries whose situations simply cannot compare to ours, at COP27. That's because here, in our country, around half of our methane emissions come from the agricultural sector. My electorate of Groom, with around 200,000 head of cattle on feedlots, is a significant contributor. We don't have the same, easy-to-find efficiencies, like fixing leaky gas pipes, that exist in other nations who have made this pledge.</para>
<para>What we do have is plentiful grazing land, generational expertise in the beef industry and significant technological research centres that make us a hotbed for innovation, efficiency and productivity gains in this vital industry. We are very proud of what we do and we want to keep doing it.</para>
<para>And, despite what some people might tell you, no affordable, practical and large-scale way exists to reduce methane emissions in agriculture, other than reducing the herd size. That includes the potential benefits of seaweed, which the government seems to be hanging this entire pledge on. There is currently no credible demonstration that this technology can be used to satisfy that 30 per cent reduction pledge. This is not speculation or uninformed commentary; this is the view from those with a stake in the game, on feedlots and in laboratories on the ground in my electorate. Much work has been done in the beef industry to improve time on feed, which has a direct impact on methane emissions. We know what we're doing, we know what needs to be done and we're doing it.</para>
<para>We also know the threat that this pledge presents to the red meat industry, because, unlike carbon, there is no way to offset methane. It cannot be sequestered. So, in the Australian context, when you hear the government talk about reducing methane emissions, they're talking about capping or reducing that industry. Under this methane pledge, Australia's national herd can't grow any bigger, because each new beast added is simply more methane. The biggest impacts of this will be visited on small, aspirational graziers who just want to build their businesses. Decisions which should be theirs, on herd size and breed, will now fall under big government regulation. This is terrible news for an industry that is still trying to grow back after it was hit hard during the last drought. We are still in the process of re-growing our herd, and this pledge makes it impossible to do that.</para>
<para>Let's turn for a moment to the government's assurances that this won't be the case—that this pledge is just 'aspirational' and won't lead to de-stocking or a new tax. How can we believe the government when this pledge itself was comprehensively ruled out by the Prime Minister on multiple occasions prior to the election? Just over a year ago, on 28 October 2021, Mr Albanese he told a journalist that it was premature for Australia to sign up to any such commitment because our cattle industry and its use of grazing is 'different from the way that agriculture and farming practices happen in other parts of the world'. Two weeks after that, on 12 November, when asked again if Labor would sign Australia up to the COP26 pledges to reduce methane emissions and phase out the use of coal, the Prime Minister said: 'We wouldn't sign up to that.' We now know that that isn't the case. The government has gone back on their commitment, and yet they seek Australia's trust.</para>
<para>At a time of workforce shortages, inflation and rising interest rates, Labor's response is more red tape, more bureaucracy and more government intervention in this very crucial and, occasionally, very fragile industry. It's taking control from an industry that has already committed to reducing emissions in a sensible and sustainable way without sacrificing productivity and handing it over to those without a stake in the game. Ultimately, it will be families at the supermarket who pay the price when the cost of meat and dairy rises. In this cost-of-living crisis, the government should be focusing on boosting our economy and not reducing it.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Bates</name>
    <name.id>300246</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms THWAITES</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to thank the member for Groom for bringing this motion forward today. It is important to have the opportunity to speak about the effect of the Albanese Labor government's efforts to address climate change, including through our signing of the Global Methane Pledge—a move that has been welcomed by the likes of the National Farmers Federation, Meat & Livestock Australia and Farmers for Climate Action.</para>
<para>I am concerned that parts of this motion seem to be grounded firmly in the type of alarmism that we have consistently seen from those opposite when it comes to talking about action on climate change. It's worth noting that it's a special 10-year anniversary this year for the member for New England. It's the 10-year anniversary of his cracker of a claim that carbon pricing would lead to a Sunday roast costing $100 and a single cow or lamb costing as much as a house. What an anniversary! When in opposition, we called on the then government to take the issue of methane seriously. We had the same member going on about some nonsense about shooting cows. These claims, from now and from then, are as ludicrous as each other.</para>
<para>After the election, I had really hoped that those opposite, coming out of nine years in government—nine years of drift and denial—might have changed. I thought they might have taken a look at themselves and their failure to take real action on climate and decide they need to change tack. I thought they might realise that the Australian people want them to start working in the country's best interests. Unfortunately, I've been brought back down to earth pretty quickly. We saw it on the climate change bill. The government, the Independents, the Greens and others in this parliament came together to deliver, for the first time in years, a real plan on climate change. But who was on the outside? Who decided they didn't want to work across the parliament on this? That was the opposition. They couldn't get their act together in nine years, and they've decided they don't plan to try doing so now that they're on the opposition benches.</para>
<para>I should credit them though; there is one idea in this space that they do seem strangely obsessed with at the moment, which is, of course, nuclear power. Again, how interesting that in nine years in office it wasn't something they progressed but, now that they're in opposition, it's apparently the great white hope! That is despite it being the least cost-effective option and despite them not being able to tell the Australian people where they plan to locate this new nuclear power they are so keen on.</para>
<para>So our government is happy to leave the opposition to this irrelevancy. In the meantime, we're getting on with the job and we're getting Australia back on track. Our government has started a new chapter. We are listening to the Australian people, who have made it clear they want a government that takes climate change seriously. Our government does, and we're matching our words with action. We are moving forward in our switch to cleaner, cheaper, renewable energy. We are treating climate change as an emergency, because it is one. There are many parts to this, and that includes the Global Methane Pledge, which, as the minister responsible has previously outlined, is an important way for countries across the world to work together on reducing methane emissions. Since coming into government, we've worked with industry and farmer groups to progress signing this pledge. We've shown that you can take a route where you work with industry to get a better future for all of us. And I do want to thank all those groups across the country who sat down with government and constructively engaged in consultation and engagement to get what is a really positive outcome for our country.</para>
<para>Those opposite don't work in this way. They work on division. They work on fear. They're stuck in some idea of the past.</para>
<para>But the fact is: Australia's farmers have been at the forefront of action on climate change, and they deserve recognition for that fact. There are some important projects that will come in this space. Some examples of those are: $4 million to trial low-emissions livestock feed technologies; $8 million to the Australian Sustainable Seaweed Alliance to support the commercialisation of seaweed as a low-emissions feed supplement—I know there is a lot of interest in this project, and I hear from a lot of corners about how important that is; and almost $5 million in grants to support the development of cost-effective technologies to deliver low-emission feed supplements to grazing livestock.</para>
<para>The opposition has just been left behind. These projects are going forward. Everyone else is moving forward. And yet those opposite don't seem to have any interest in doing the same.</para>
<para>In contrast, our government will keep getting on with the job. We are working hard to take action on climate change and we are working together with communities, together with industry and together with Australia's agriculture and farming industry to do so. We're governing for all Australians, for a better future for all of us. We are working to address the very real challenges that this country faces and we are taking the Australian people with us as we do it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr TED O'BRIEN</name>
    <name.id>138932</name.id>
    <electorate>Fairfax</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm delighted to be seconding this motion moved by the member for Groom. Context counts. Right now, Australia is experiencing inflation that's almost out of control. The cost of living is biting hard in every household, but this government is not taking any action on it. Despite promising a $275 reduction in household power bills, power bills are skyrocketing. The budget forecast an increase of over 50 per cent in electricity next financial year. The government is taking no action on that. We have businesses screaming out, the Australian Workers Union is talking about 800,000 manufacturing jobs being at risk, we have businesses that might close their doors in this country because of skyrocketing energy prices and the budget suggests that there will be price increases of over 40 per cent in gas in the next financial year. The government is not acting on that. The budget shows that the economic modelling that underpins the entire energy policy suite of the government is flawed, yet the government is taking no action on that.</para>
<para>But there is something that the government is acting on. The government has decided that, in the midst of an energy crisis with all this pressure bearing down on Australian households and industries, now is the time to sign a global methane pledge. This is an opportunity to get on the world stage, to beat their chest and say that we are joining with other nations on a global pledge. The problem isn't just with the substance of what the government has agreed to but the fact that it is yet another broken promise. In opposition the now Prime Minister was very happy to stand alongside the coalition and refuse to sign the global pledge, agreeing with the coalition government that this pledge should not be signed. That was the government's position when in opposition, but now in their first six months in office they have added this broken promise to a long list of broken promises. This is nothing less than doing one thing in government that is very different from what you said in opposition. Those opposite know that, but they're very relaxed about it because there are just so many broken promises from this new government.</para>
<para>When it comes to the substance—this is the far more important point—we hear a lot of motherhood statements from those opposite, and I'm sure the government speakers to come will make them. It is speech after speech of motherhood statements. But what they cannot tell the Australian people, let alone those in the energy, resources and agriculture sectors, is how much this pledged commitment will cost and who will pay for it. That is typical of what we see from the government when it comes to climate and energy policy. They will agree to high-level targets without having done any homework whatsoever on how those targets will be achieved, how much it will cost to achieve them and who will pay for them. I welcome those on the government benches who will be speaking to outline the cost to Australia and how it is going to be paid for.</para>
<para>We already know that the government has an absolute disregard for the gas industry at a time when, despite a warning from the ACCC and a lot of other authoritative agencies that we need more gas, there is pressure on us having more gas poured into the system. We know that signing this methane pledge will only put more pressure on gas developers and generators, but the real heartburn for the Australian economy is to the agricultural sector, and to livestock in particular. No-one in government and no-one in industry can explain how this target will be achieved with the technology that exists today. It can't be done, yet they're happy to sign a pledge that somehow Australia will develop on it.</para>
<para>Industry is doing a great job, by the way, and the coalition backed them; that's why we put $18 million into ensuring that we were working with industry. But we are going to have no technology that can deliver on this methane reduction pledge. Do you know what that means? Those opposite, those in government, are wanting this to be delivered by changes in behaviour. They want people to eat less meat. They want the farmers to have fewer cattle in their herd. They should not be signing this pledge. They should not have broken their promise. But that's what the Labor government does. (<inline font-style="italic">Time expired</inline>)</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I hazard a guess that there wouldn't be too many MPs opposite that would have a painting of a Friesian cow in their parliamentary office like I do, but, growing up on a dairy farm and being surrounded by literally thousands of Friesian dairy cows all my life, you could say I very much have a fondness for cows, dairy farmers and the community that supports them. In fact, I saw hundreds of dairy calves just yesterday when I dropped off my working Kelpie dog, Jip, to start his shift with my son.</para>
<para>After over half a century surrounded by dairy cattle, I've seen dairy farming change a lot. Dairy farmers have had to adapt to survive. But I have a saying: the smart farmers are adapting. Many have adapted to larger herds, some of gone to smaller herds and diversified into producing for gourmet cheeses. There is a thirst from the community for good local milk and milk products. People want to know where their milk comes from, how it is produced and that it's made in the most sustainable way, and the community want to support their local farmers. As I said, the smart farmers know this and have already been adapting.</para>
<para>They've also been adapting to reducing emissions, whether it's more solar, biofuels from manure, recycling effluent water and irrigating on their farm, and planting more trees. They've adapted to becoming more resilient to drought, bushfires, floods, storms, even a tornado and the next natural disaster that hits. Why? Because it's the right thing to do. It's the right thing for reducing emissions. It's the right thing for supporting the environment that has supported our farmers for generations. It makes good business sense for the ongoing viability of the farm.</para>
<para>So does it surprise me that Australia has joined with 122 other nations, including the United States, Canada, New Zealand and Germany, to reduce global methane emissions across all sectors by at least 30 per cent below 2020 levels by 2030? Not at all. In fact, it's a worldwide pledge, which does not mean that each country must meet the 30 per cent reduction; it's about global efforts to reducing emissions from methane. It is nonbinding, and individual countries are not assigned targets. In signing the pledge it will not include binding legislated methane targets and will not require reduced agricultural production or livestock numbers.</para>
<para>Farmer Tim says he doesn't want a methane tax. Well, Farmer Tim, I agree with you. We can have a pledge and meet our targets without a tax. In fact, we can use projects like the fab cow poo farm that Farmer Tim is a part of. Fabulous. Who needs a tax? Farmer Tim is all over it, even without all those red socialist jackets that Farmer Daniel doesn't like.</para>
<para>You see, I really do love our dairy farmers—the good bits, the odd bits and everything in between. The simple truth is the Australian livestock industry is already pushing ahead with a strong emissions reduction agenda, including the use of feed supplements, investment into sustainable agricultural practices, improved livestock and manure management practices, and breeding lower emissions animals. Who'd have thought? Even the National Farmers Federation have said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Signing the pledge signals Australia's voluntary commitment to participation in global action on methane emissions.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">For agriculture it will reinforce our demonstrated commitment to sustainability and ongoing access to key markets as an export orientated sector.</para></quote>
<para>And a joint statement announced by the Australian Livestock Exporters Council, the Australian Lot Feeders Association, the Australian Meat Industry Council, the Cattle Council of Australia, the Goat Industry Council of Australia, Sheep Producers Australia and the Red Meat Advisory Council says:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Today's announcement shows the government has listened to our concerns and recognises the Australian red meat and livestock industry is proactively addressing emissions and is well advanced in achieving its CN30 target. Industry's net emissions have reduced by almost 60% since 2005, representing by far the greatest reduction by any sector of Australia's economy.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">With the right policy settings and ongoing research investment, our industry can be at the forefront of the climate solution.</para></quote>
<para>Since coming to government, the minister has worked with industry and farmer groups to progress signing this pledge. Our farmers have been at the forefront of action on climate change, and I want to thank them for that. We will continue to reduce methane in the agricultural sector through technology innovation incentives and partnerships with farmers. I have always supported local farmers and I always will.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING</title>
          <page.no>115</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the Government's $9.6 billion of funding in the 2022-23 October budget for the infrastructure that Australia needs, including but not limited to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) upgrading the Bruce Highway in Queensland;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) building electric bus charging infrastructure for Perth's electric bus network;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) investing in Tasmania's Bass and Tasman highways;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) investing in South Australia's Dukes and Augusta highways;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(e) partnering with the Victorian Government to deliver Melbourne's Suburban Rail Loop;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(f) improving Canberra's cycle routes;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(g) sealing the Northern Territory's Tanami Road and upgrading the Central Arnhem Road; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(h) investing in Western Sydney's Road Package; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) notes this funding will make journeys quicker and ensure Australians return home to their families safely.</para></quote>
<para>It was great to be able to sit in the main chamber and watch my mate and neighbour, the Treasurer Jim Chalmers, hand down the Albanese government's first budget last month. It was a true Labor budget, a responsible budget considering the current instability of the world markets and other factors that impact outside of the government's control. However, this motion acknowledges the $9.6 billion of funding contained within the Albanese government's first budget that will go towards the infrastructure that Australia needs. I choose these words carefully as, for almost the last decade, money has not always gone where it was most needed to improve the country for Australians. Instead, it has often going to where it is most electorally favourable for the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison governments. Again, I say: this funding will be invested in the infrastructure that Australia needs. Importantly, this infrastructure pipeline will deliver boosts to every corner of Australia.</para>
<para>Coming from north of the Tweed, I will start with infrastructure spending in Queensland. Whether it is investing in improving the Bruce Highway between Gladstone and Rockhampton—that is, Yeppin, not Yeppoon—as well as in Brisbane's outer north or working with the Queensland government by locking in funding to get on with stage 1 of the Coomera connector—or better known locally as the second M1.</para>
<para>On the other side of the country, in Western Australia we are helping to build electric bus charging infrastructure for Perth's electric bus network to provide green public transport. Tasmanians do not miss out. They will get safer, faster travel through upgrades to the Bass and Tasman highways. In New South Wales, there is $300 of new money for the Western Sydney roads package. And we are investing right here in the ACT to improve Canberra's cycling routes, which will take more cars off the road and make it safer for people and families to get around for work and for fun. We are investing in South Australia's Dukes and Augusta highways, as well as sealing the Northern Territory's Tanami Road and upgrading the Central Arnhem Road—great for those communities.</para>
<para>I cannot not forget Victoria, where we are partnering with the state government to deliver the important Melbourne Suburban Rail Loop. The rail loop will deliver a 90-kilometre rail line that will link every major train service from the Frankston line to the Werribee line via Melbourne Airport. Much like the Cross River Rail project in Brisbane, this is a vital heavy rail network infrastructure project that was ideologically opposed by the Liberal-Nationals. You have to wonder whether the coalition just does not like helping to build much-needed heavy rail infrastructure of the future, or perhaps it may have more to do that they do not want to go back into major projects put forward by Labor state governments, which goes back to my earlier point: the Albanese government is about delivering infrastructure that Australia needs, not about pork barrelling, not about doing unfunded projects such as building car parks for train lines that are not needed.</para>
<para>However, the former Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison governments were interested in spending lots of money, borrowing money in fact, taking us into deeper and deeper debt, but only to win or help when marginal seats. Maybe this is why Labor governments are the ones that build nation-defining infrastructure projects, not the Liberal and National parties. This budget investment will help Australians get around quicker and safer whether it is for work, for family or for pleasure and that will be good for our productivity. The Albanese government has stripped the waste and rorts and is getting on with delivering an infrastructure pipeline that states, communities and contractors can rely on.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Rae</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:24</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I appreciate the opportunity this motion provides to speak on infrastructure funding in the budget, although there are not a lot of new announcements for South Australia. Unlike the member for Moreton, the previous speaker, I'll give a full five minutes on what wasn't in the budget—the lost opportunities—when it comes to my home city of Adelaide in particular. Every year a budget is handed down it provides an opportunity for the government, not just in recurrent terms but also in long-term investment terms, to talk about the priorities the government has for this nation and the parts of the country it really cares about and takes an opportunity to invest in.</para>
<para>Unfortunately from Adelaide's point of view, we didn't have any new announcements in investment. One of the really frightening things that are unravelling in South Australia right now is de-investment in infrastructure of the major north-south road corridor in Adelaide. Under previous Liberal governments that project was going to be completed and there was going to finally be a continuous proper carriageway running from well south of metropolitan Adelaide through the city and north beyond Gawler.</para>
<para>Until recently there had been consensus on both sides of politics to invest in the north-south corridor. The final stages of that, which were worked through, developed and brought to the Commonwealth government by the Marshall government, were duly invested in by the Morrison government. Unfortunately, we now have two Labor governments that are looking for every excuse they can find to delay and push that project into the never-never of the future.</para>
<para>There is a good budget outcome for the state Labor government when it comes to pretending that there are all these challenges in finishing the job there. It makes their numbers look better than the reality. There is an outcome for the Commonwealth in that in the sense that equally their payments are pushed further into the future. It means that the South Australian economy misses out. Investment that could be happening sooner is not happening under this government and under the state Labor government. That is going to have an enormous impact if the economic cycle moves—and it is, regrettably, on that trajectory.</para>
<para>We will need those infrastructure construction jobs coming online in the next couple of years. They won't be in South Australia. As other projects are finishing up there is the very significant risk—and it's turning into a likelihood—of a valley of death when it comes to infrastructure job opportunities in the South Australian economy. Regrettably, it is likely that's going to happen at a time when the economic cycle needs that investment quite desperately.</para>
<para>The government talked in this budget about some of the challenges on delivering on infrastructure right now because there are so many projects, labour shortages et cetera. The north-south corridor project was always due to start in a few years time, but it is now going to blow out way beyond that. The state government have made that admission, but they are yet to fully reveal by how much that timing is going to push out. We need those jobs coming online for the workers who are working on other infrastructure projects that will be coming to an end in the next couple of years. The next set of infrastructure projects, particularly that mammoth infrastructure project, would have provided certainty for the infrastructure workforce in South Australia. Those projects will not be there to pick up the slack.</para>
<para>This will have really serious economic consequences when those jobs won't be there in a couple of years time. South Australia will equally suffer enormous economic costs because of that infrastructure not coming online when it was meant to. It will miss out on the productivity gains for the economy and for commuters because of that not being completed on the time line that was in place under the previous government.</para>
<para>It is tricky and sneaky accounting. It does falsely make budgets look better, particularly the state government's budget. It is equally going to have an enormous economic toll. I'm very concerned about the next couple of years as infrastructure workers start to come off of current projects. The decisions that could have been made in this budget to bring projects on have not been made. That impact will be on Labor at the state and federal levels. They will be held to account for that because it is up to governments to invest in productive infrastructure in the future. This budget has done the opposite. It's going to take an enormous economic toll on the South Australian economy.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BRIAN MITCHELL</name>
    <name.id>129164</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyons</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Moreton for moving this motion, and I join with him in acknowledging the $9.6 billion of funding that the Albanese Labor government has committed in the budget to deliver the infrastructure that Australia needs. Infrastructure under Labor is about improving productivity and improving safety; it's not about electoral margins. We will deliver infrastructure that puts community interest first, not political self-interest. Our budget takes an important first step in ensuring that the Commonwealth's infrastructure spending is responsible, affordable and sustainable. The total investment in transport infrastructure in every state and territory in this budget is $55 billion over the forward estimates for new and existing projects.</para>
<para>Investment in my home state of Tasmania—our home state, Deputy Speaker Wilkie—much of it in Lyons, which takes up half our state's landmass, includes $540 million to improve roads and highways, including the Bass Highway, the Tasman Highway and the east and west Tamar highways; $629 million for the new Bridgewater Bridge, which I know you'd be doubly excited about, Deputy Speaker, which is finally underway after a decade of dithering; $150 million to upgrade the Hobart to Sorell transport corridor; and up to $35 million for the TRANSlink transport hub near Launceston Airport.</para>
<para>The Roads of Strategic Importance initiative is ensuring our key freight roads efficiently connect areas of regional and remote economic activity to ports, airports and other transport hubs. Under ROSI we are delivering projects like targeted upgrades on the Bass Highway between Deloraine and Devonport and the Northern Roads Package, which includes upgrades to Birralee Road between Westbury and Frankford. We also have the Road Safety Program, which has been extended out a year so it can reflect the road safety action plan, which is currently being negotiated. This program is part of the government's commitment to reducing deaths and serious injuries on our roads, and it is delivering important safety upgrades to Tasmanian roads, including Colebrook Road, Tea Tree Road, Upper Scamander Road and Lake Leake Road. As announced in the budget, the Priority Community Infrastructure Program will provide $1.4 billion for local community sport and transport projects across Australia.</para>
<para>There have been several events recently in Tasmania that have highlighted the importance of good roads and investment in transport infrastructure. Last year, for example, Tasman Highway was closed for six weeks at Paradise Gorge. It's a picturesque but narrow section next to the Prosser River and just west of Orford. A large rock had loomed over the highway for decades, and, after it showed recent sign of movement, the decision was made to remove and remediate. This meant that people traveling from Hobart to the east coast had to detour south-east through Wielangta Road, a long and winding gravel road, or they had to go north via Lake Leake, which is miles out of the way. It was all a massive disruption for residents and businesses, but, as is always the case in Tasmania, the community came together and made it work as well as could be expected. A quick aside: I look forward to an announcement any day now from the Liberal state government about the sealing of Wielangta Road, something I've been calling for for years, because it's a terrific alternative coastal route. Back in June last year, the Tasmanian Minister for Infrastructure and Transport said it was his intention to progress with sealing, but I haven't heard much from him since.</para>
<para>More recently, as in many parts of the country, floods and storms across my electorate have damaged roads, forcing closures and causing delays. Both roads in and out of St Marys in Tasmania's north-east were flooded, causing difficulties for residents and emergency services. St Marys Pass, a winding section of Esk Highway between the town of St Marys and the east coast, remains closed due to rockfall and landslip, with no ETA for reopening. The alternative route, Elephant Pass, has limited access. I'm informed that school bus drivers are reluctant to use it and that alternative arrangements are being made to accommodate students who would normally travel between St Marys and the coast. With travel between St Marys and St Helens on the coast so important for tourism, shopping and commerce, there's a growing call for an alternative route to be created, and I look forward to working with the St Marys community and other stakeholders on how best to progress their concerns.</para>
<para>What we know for sure is that access is too important to leave to the caprice of the weather gods. As Minister Catherine King has previously said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Good roads are the lifeblood of communities across Tasmania—and improving safety and travel time is really important for local families and the economy.</para></quote>
<para>I thank the minister for her commitment to improving Tasmania's infrastructure and look forward to working with her over this term to deliver on Labor's commitments to my state and my electorate. We will deliver our commitments, unlike the other side, which dithered for over a decade.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:34</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr McCORMACK</name>
    <name.id>219646</name.id>
    <electorate>Riverina</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Lyons should have read it like he meant it. Their hearts are not in this motion. I'll tell you why their hearts are not in this motion: because they know, and the member for Lyons certainly knows, that Tasmanian infrastructure will now go lacking because of the Labor federal government.</para>
<para>I worked well with the Tasmanian Liberal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Michael Ferguson, to actually build things, to get on and do things, whether they were arterial roads, whether they were the Scottsdale dam in north-east Tasmania, which was started and finished in my time as Deputy Prime Minister because you can get on and build water infrastructure. Those opposite don't understand that concept. They don't get it. They don't want to do it.</para>
<para>The person who actually put this motion forward, the member for Moreton, the Brisbane based MP from Labor, tweeted on 1 November 2021:</para>
<quote><para class="block">My grandfather was a grader driver during the Great Depression. If a road hasn't had a grader on it since the Thirties why on earth would a responsible federal government make it a priority now while the population in the bush is decreasing?</para></quote>
<para>That was from the person who put this motion forward. It says a lot about the fact that he doesn't have his heart in this motion. He had a full minute and five seconds to go in his five-minute contribution and still couldn't put the time into talking about what he supposedly believes in when it comes to infrastructure. Let me remind him of some of the comments that came in following that tweet.</para>
<quote><para class="block">As a rural bloke, this is the most short sighted and selfish stance I've heard. Essentially this doesn't affect me and I've seen some ppl relocate to the city, so let's keep the access roads, used by many, in a 3rd world condition."</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">Hit the bricks Graham</para></quote>
<para>That was from mattwilson_77. There are others. Gray Connolly replied:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Is this honestly the ALP position? That if you live outside an urban area, you should just accept roads that are third world?</para></quote>
<para>Let me tell you: not only are the roads atrocious due to recent weather events in regional Australia; they are dangerous. What does it take? Does it take a small vehicle, or indeed a heavy truck, to hit a pothole, veer off and kill somebody before somebody does something about an emergency fund for our rural roads?</para>
<para>As the member for Wide Bay reminded me only this morning, you're twice as likely to die on a regional road than you are on a metropolitan road, and yet the member for Moreton talks about more cycle paths in Canberra. Go figure. More cycle paths in Canberra! If you ever saw a pothole in Canberra, you would think the members representing the Canberra electorates would throw their hands up and think, 'This is the worst thing of all.' Cars in rural Australia at the moment are veering sideways—every which way—to avoid the very dangerous potholes that have been caused by recent weather events. As the minister for infrastructure, I put record funding into local roads and community infrastructure under Roads to Recovery, and it's incumbent upon this government to do something about the dreadful state of rural roads at the moment.</para>
<para>In his tweet the member for Moreton talked about the population in the bush decreasing. It's just not true. In fact, regional Australia grew by 832,000 people, increasing by 11 per cent, according to the stats available from Australian Bureau of Statistics data since the 2017 ERP. Regional cities were the growth area during COVID. You know that, Deputy Speaker Wilkie, and so do so many others. Apparently that's been lost on the member for Moreton.</para>
<para>Our regional electorates deserve funding. It's not about pork-barrelling. It's about them getting their fair share. It's about them getting the key infrastructure that they need, whether that's dams—I note that so much of the money has been pulled out of the dam water infrastructure that we had in there, and it's been put into such things as cycle paths in Canberra. This is a disgrace. Yes, sure, we need our public servants to have good facilities, amenities and infrastructure like everybody else, but not at the expense of regional, rural and remote people, who carried this nation during COVID-19.</para>
<para>Agriculture and resources carried this nation. When everybody else was pulling the doonas up over their heads and worrying about the pandemic, regional Australians were rolling up their sleeves and getting on with the job of carrying this nation, of shouldering the burden of responsibility to keep this nation's economy going. So for the member for Moreton to come in here and talk up infrastructure, when Labor is actually pulling back infrastructure and taking it away from the regional areas that protected and saved this nation during the pandemic, is, quite frankly, a disgrace. He should be ashamed of himself and so should Labor for ruining the bush during the budget.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:40</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to thank the member for Moreton for this motion. He knows that the growth of this country is in the regions, which is why he put this motion forward. The fact is that he is a great supporter of the regions. And we're fortunate in federal Labor that we've got a prime minister who not only understands the regions but understands infrastructure. That's why we saw such investments as we did, including in my electorate and in the Northern Territory, in this budget. The Prime Minister knows, as does the member for Moreton, that there has been a shift to our regions from capital cities during COVID. Lots of Australians are realising that outside of Sydney and Melbourne, and perhaps Brisbane, there's a great life to be had—it's a balance of work and lifestyle. There are many benefits to living in the regions. More than that, if we're going to have sustainable economic growth into the future, that cannot happen without enabling infrastructure for our regions.</para>
<para>There is a massive and untapped potential in our country, including in my electorate and the member for Lingiari's electorate in the Northern Territory. That's why in this recent budget there was a massive $2.5 billion—that's 'billion' a 'b'—investment into this enabling infrastructure in the Northern Territory, $1.5 billion of which is going to the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct, which I will reflect on a bit.</para>
<para>This development at Middle Arm is a centrepiece for the Northern Territory moving towards a more sustainable economy into the future—in fact, moving towards a $40 billion economy, but sustainable. The Northern Territory has abundant natural solar resources—we've got plenty of sun—but also critical minerals. We'll need those minerals to build the batteries and the solar panels as we work as a nation, as part of a concerted global commitment, towards a clean-energy economy. At Middle Arm, we're going to build a renewable energy hub. Honourable members would have heard about Sun Cable. It's going to be the largest solar project in the world and will be part of the Middle Arm development. Green hydrogen and ammonia, which, of course, are the foundations for cleaner fuel and a sustainable future feeding the planet, will also be manufactured there. We're also going to have a data storage centre at the Middle Arm precinct, powered by solar power, which will serve global markets. It's not, as some have misleadingly claimed, a petrochemicals hub. As the Chief Minister, Natasha Fyles, said, as recently as the weekend, 'It is not a petrochemical plant.' For Territorians who might just be starting to hear about this project, it's identifying that we need that balance between our harbour and our environment, but we also need to have industry. Rather than having eight or 10 projects that in isolation might seem okay, but then you get to the end of it and go, 'Hang on, they're scattered throughout our harbour,' as a single, collective project this is co-located. We're doing a whole assessment of that Middle Arm project, but each project will go through the appropriate checks and balances individually as well. It's about shared resources and enabling infrastructure, which is what this Commonwealth government investment is all about. The Chief Minister went on to say that the Territory's rigorous environmental rules would also ensure the environment was covered as the project went ahead. She said:</para>
<quote><para class="block">It's really important for Territorians to understand we've got some of the most vigorous environmental protections and community impact legislation that we've worked through and this will go through every assessment</para></quote>
<para>That's the NT Chief Minister. She is, as I am, deeply committed to the environmental health of our Darwin Harbour; we're absolutely committed to that. (<inline font-style="italic">Time expired</inline>)</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:45</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PASIN</name>
    <name.id>240756</name.id>
    <electorate>Barker</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'm privileged to serve in the role of assistant shadow minister for infrastructure and transport. When I assumed that position, I took the opportunity to recodify, if you like, the coalition's commitment to the $120 billion worth of infrastructure projects in the nation's infrastructure pipeline. That's the legacy of the coalition government having worked very hard to establish that pipeline. Why did we do that? We did that because, of course, infrastructure is the driving force behind our nation's economy. It's about making our freight task safer and more efficient. It's about growing the productivity of the nation.</para>
<para>On budget night I was concerned to see what had happened to the $120 billion pipeline. We need to be really clear: those opposite are running a very cute me-too campaign on infrastructure. It's like, 'Yes, us too,' so much so that they're even claiming to have maintained the $120 billion in the infrastructure pipeline. But, when you dig a little deeper, you start to be introduced to phrases like 'reprofiling expenditure'. So effectively what's happened is two things.</para>
<para>Flat out, $2.8 billion worth of projects have been cancelled. That's clear. If you want to know more about that, there are people walking around parliament at the moment running a campaign to build the Rockhampton Ring Road. That was a project of incredible importance to the people of Queensland and of particular importance to the people of Rockhampton. That was out to tender, and it's been cancelled. So you can't really run the me-too argument. At least have a go at explaining it to those people that have travelled over three days, 20 hours of driving, over 2,000 kilometres to come here to simply make one statement: keep your promise. Of course, that statement relates to the then Leader of the Opposition, Anthony Albanese, making the statement that he would continue with the building of the ring road.</para>
<para>But I'm more interested in the too-cute-by-half approach when it comes to infrastructure otherwise—that is, $6.5 billion in unspecified road and rail projects have been delayed by a government that said it would be more transparent and more open with the Australian people. That's not me saying that; that's their budget. That's straight out of the budget documents. Of course, if you're running a me-too argument when it's really not a me-too situation or reality, then you also start claiming credit for projects that were coalition commitments and embedded in a series of budgets leading up to it. My friend opposite just mentioned the Middle Arm project. That is a coalition project, and I'm grateful those opposite have seen merit in it. There are others: the Outback Way project, for example, and, in South Australia, a congestion-busting project in Marion.</para>
<para>I then looked for fresh money in the budget, because that's what you do. It's not about what's already in the budget, projected and programmed over four years, albeit what I said about reprofiling out of the forward estimates. Where's the new money? I've got to tell you: there's scant little of it, and, where it exists, it does not prioritise regional Australia, which disproportionately carries the burden of our nation's freight tasks. No-one's going to argue with me that the disproportionate amount of freight task occurs in regional Australia as we take our product, whether it's off farm or out of a mine, to its destination, often ports in metropolitan cities. What I was doing was looking for fresh money, and I found some, from a South Australia perspective. I thought, 'Brilliant.' There's $460 million of new money for infrastructure projects in the budget for South Australia. But then I checked the footnote. Do you know what the footnote said? It said 'over 10 years'. So those opposite are celebrating the fact that they're spending $460 million of new money in South Australia on road projects over 10 years, with $400 million of that on the Stuart, Augusta and Dukes highways. Technically, that money could be spent in 2032. Please! One hundred and twenty billion dollars of infrastructure in the pipeline? You're running a me-too argument and coming to this place with a self-congratulatory motion like this? You're kidding yourself.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:50</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs PHILLIPS</name>
    <name.id>147140</name.id>
    <electorate>Gilmore</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am delighted to rise today to speak on this motion acknowledging the nation-building infrastructure that the Albanese government is delivering in its very first budget. In my electorate of Gilmore on the New South Wales South Coast, the state of our roads is incredibly important. Our train line ends at Bomaderry, so we rely on our roads more heavily than do places like Wollongong or Sydney. The South Coast is a major tourism drawcard, and the Princes Highway is the lifeblood that connects tourists to our magnificent towns and villages. It's also the connector that brings in feed for farmers' cattle and connects our produce with national and international markets. As well, it takes our kids to school and allows people to get to work.</para>
<para>In school holidays, it can take local people two, three or four times as long to get anywhere—and that's on a good day. If there's an accident—which, heartbreakingly, all too often there is—then traffic can be stuck at a standstill for hours. Many of our road blackspots and bottlenecks are notorious. Local people know where they are and know that they could be fixed with the right investment.</para>
<para>Our community has been fighting for the infrastructure we deserve for many years, and I have been a proud champion of that fight. I have joined with our community to call on the previous federal government to bring forward promised funding for the Princes Highway—particularly in the wake of the bushfires and the pandemic, when we needed the economic boost. We fought for a flyover for the Jervis Bay road intersection—an infamous pinch point, where the New South Wales government wanted to stick a roundabout. Another famous pinch point sees traffic coming to a standstill through the Milton and Ulladulla townships. We need a bypass desperately, but governments at a state and federal level have dragged their heels. I spent years calling for this funding to be brought forward. They resisted. But we won on every occasion, helping to deliver hundreds of millions of dollars in local road improvements, dragging Liberal state and federal governments kicking and screaming every step of the way.</para>
<para>These are just a few examples of the roads projects I have helped to secure from opposition and as part of the community. There are many more. It's been hard work, but, together, we are starting to see real improvement.</para>
<para>The Albanese government is delivering billions of dollars in nation-building infrastructure, and my electorate on the New South Wales South Coast is a top priority. As part of the budget, we have recommitted $752 million in Australian government funding for the Milton-Ulladulla bypass, because we know how important it is. I'm incredibly proud of that.</para>
<para>We've also delivered $40 million to help Shoalhaven City Council fix local potholed roads which are in a terrible state after months of relentless rain. It won't do everything, but it's a start.</para>
<para>For comparison, the New South Wales government has given local councils a share in $50 million to help fix the roads—something that was celebrated by our local state members. But, honestly, how far will that go? A few hundred thousand dollars per council won't make much of a dent.</para>
<para>The new Nowra Bridge will be a fantastic asset for the Shoalhaven community, but it won't solve all of our problems. What we need now is the Nowra bypass, and I have been joining with local people calling for this for many years. Liberal governments at state and federal levels haven't wanted to know about this project. We could be ready to start construction now, but they have ignored our calls for years.</para>
<para>During the election campaign, I was the first one to make a commitment to the Nowra bypass, and now I have delivered $32 million as part of the budget to get the pre-planning works finally started. I was really delighted that the New South Wales government committed $8 million towards this, during the campaign, but it turns out that this was another hollow statement, because, in their last budget before the state election, they didn't include one dollar for the Nowra bypass. The minister said the Albanese government needed to deliver on our promise first—a strange perspective, if you ask me. But today I say to the minister: we have delivered on our commitment; now it is time for you to deliver on yours. We need the Nowra bypass off the ground, and I will keep working every day to ensure this happens as quickly as possible.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>11:55</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It seems this government is very selective when it comes to strategic nation-building. We are at a critical time for our nation's economy. The smart thing to do would be to invest in the parts of Australia that produce the nation's wealth and make sure that they receive the required infrastructure. But apparently this Labor government is more concerned with rewarding those who voted for it and punishing those who didn't.</para>
<para>When the coalition was in government we invested billions in regional roads like the Mackay Ring Road and the Mackay north access upgrade, which was a huge reprieve for all road users in and around Mackay. We funded upgrades to the Haughton River Bridge and delivered record funding for all upgrades to local roads in regional council areas. Along the Bruce Highway we delivered funding for overtaking lanes, for shoulders and for widening the roads. We targeted black spots and increased the number of rest areas. The coalition did significant legwork, and the new Labor government is rolling all of that back.</para>
<para>Sadly, the inaction, the delays and the cuts for regional Australia are history repeating itself for Labor. We saw this first from the state government, and we are now seeing it from the federal government. Take the roadworks north and south of Bowen, for example, which are right smack in the middle of my electorate of Dawson. The coalition government funded these works to ensure safer and more-efficient roads, but the state Labor government has dropped the ball. Nothing is happening. You can't even call them roadworks, because no work is actually being done—it's stagnant. And now speed limits are reduced to a crawl. Worst of all, the state Labor government doesn't seem to care too much. I've written to the Minister for Transport and Main Roads, and I'm still waiting for a reply. What have I heard? Nothing, crickets.</para>
<para>The member for Moreton and the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government might want to herald their Bruce Highway funding as a coup for regional Australia. In reality, the funding is all for Brisbane and surrounds. What an insult to the 30 per cent of Australians who live in regional Australia. What an insult to the people in my electorate of Dawson. The Bruce Highway is our main connector from the city to the bush. It is the key road that allows supplies to be delivered to Dawson for our industries, our farms and our hospitals. It is a vital corridor for getting our produce to market and, more importantly, food and fibre to the shelves of Australian supermarkets and other shops. The Bruce Highway enables residents in Dawson to get to their medical appointments. When you're in the bush you don't have specialists just around the corner.</para>
<para>More importantly still, the safety of families and road users in regional Australia is at stake. We know that twice as many people die on the roads in the country as in the cities. The politicking of this new government is making my people more vulnerable. The neglect of our highway at the hands of state Labor exposes their disdain for the people who didn't vote for them. The previous coalition government gave them money to complete the works, but the project continues to fall down the list of priorities.</para>
<para>Regional Aussies deserve more from their government, which was elected to represent everyone, not just those who voted for them—in particular, those in the south-east corner. Not only are these actions reckless, they are just plain foolish. Our part of the world in central and north Queensland is one of the biggest heavyweights in producing our nation's wealth. Our agriculture, our coal—there was a lost opportunity for Labor in the last budget. They need to continue the good work of the coalition.</para>
<para>When regional Australia is strong the whole nation is strong, but this government is leaving regional Australia behind, and it is to the nation's peril. I urged the infrastructure to minister and this Labor government to right this wrong. Prioritise regional infrastructure. Look after regional and rural Australia because regional and rural Australia looks after you. Otherwise this whole nation, this great nation of ours, will suffer, and it is purely not acceptable. Labor needs to do the right thing here and look after those who look after Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:00</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GARLAND</name>
    <name.id>295588</name.id>
    <electorate>Chisholm</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to thank the member for Moreton for moving this motion. I was really delighted to have the opportunity to second this. I'm really thrilled, as I know the member for Moreton is, to be part of an Albanese government with a minister for infrastructure who really cares about making sure that all of our communities have the transport infrastructure that they need to thrive. I also note that the member for Ballarat, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, knows my electorate, the electorate of Chisholm, very well, having grown up there, and in fact my grandfather was her maths teacher. I always like reflecting on that local connection.</para>
<para>I will paint a picture of what my electorate is like. We have wonderful schools. People move into my electorate for the high-quality schools, both public and private. They are people who want to see their children go to one of the local universities, Deakin University and Monash University. But one of the big issues at the moment is that we're lacking the transport infrastructure we need to really unlock the economic potential of this part of Melbourne. We're just about to open a heart hospital on the Monash University campus in Clayton. Moderna, of course, has just announced that they will be establishing their premises, creating thousands of jobs in my electorate too.</para>
<para>The issue is that we've lacked the vital north to south and east to west connections in particular parts of my electorate for too long. One of the very first announcements I was able to make during the election campaign—and I'm so delighted to see that we've committed to this in the budget—is a business case for the trackless rapid transport project. This is a project that will connect Caulfield to Rowville. That cuts through the southern part of my electorate across Wellington Road. What that means is that people who will need to go to the university to access the new heart hospital, which is Australia's first specialist cardiac hospital, will be able to do so easily without being in congested traffic, with a dedicated, special lane for this trackless rapid transport vehicle.</para>
<para>Of course, many people have spoken about connecting this part of Melbourne with transport infrastructure, but it is the federal Labor government who've made that first commitment to investigate a business case. I'm so pleased, and I know my community is so pleased. I know the university is very delighted with this, having led that project. I thank them for their efforts in putting together the work that was so compelling to me to understand exactly why it is that we need this particular transport to be provided. I know that with Moderna, with the Synchrotron, with the CSIRO and with so many other innovative businesses wanting to establish themselves in this precinct in Clayton it will be a very welcome investment indeed.</para>
<para>Additionally, the Suburban Rail Loop will make it easier to access the northern and southern corridors through my electorate and will finally connect the Monash and Deakin universities to one another. That opens up a whole lot of collaborative opportunities that I know a lot of people, myself included, are really excited about. At the announcement for the $2.2 billion to be invested in the Suburban Rail Loop, I think it was really timely to remember this week that the Prime Minister was asked whether he supported a pay rise for some of the lowest-paid workers in the country, and, of course, he said 'absolutely', because that is what a federal Labor government stands for. Again, better jobs will be possible when we have these better transport connections.</para>
<para>As I said, it really is key to unlocking the economic potential in the south-east. I was really dismayed to see, under the former coalition government, the city deal, which was so hard fought for by the local community for the south-east of Melbourne, effectively ripped up. We've been waiting for the kinds of investment we're seeing from the Labor government at the moment in my area. I know that local industry, businesses, education institutions and residents are really excited about what this will mean.</para>
<para>I'm thrilled to be part of a government that's actually making commitments to get things done, things that have been sorely lacking for years. It's a delight for me to be part of such a visionary government led, of course, by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and with our very capable minister for infrastructure, the member for Ballarat. I once again thank the member for Moreton for moving this very important motion today.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:05</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The member for Chisholm mentioned Wellington Road. It's interesting that she talked about the funding of Wellington Road. It's something I am passionate about and have spoken about in this House. She failed to mention the $110 million that this government has ripped out of the Wellington Road duplication project in the outer east, in Casey, Aston and La Trobe. That duplication was about saving lives and about getting people off the Dandenong Ranges in a bushfire emergency. The duplication was to allow emergency services to get up to the mountain and residents to get off. This motion talks about getting families home safely. I would love to hear from the government about another project that is more important than this one that would allow people to escape from bushfires. Once again we hear from this government and the member for Chisholm a lot of spin and talk. They don't talk about the money they're ripping from communities that would save lives in a bushfire emergency.</para>
<para>The former coalition government wanted to help regional Australians. They wanted to expand infrastructure projects, to make roads safer and more effective and to employ Australians along the way. In the same budget where the Labor Party has ignored the important infrastructure projects at hand it has also cancelled about $2 billion in grants that were promised by the coalition. Additionally, the Labor Party is cutting $4.6 billion of the previous coalition government's water projects over the next 12 years.</para>
<para>We have heard from the member for Chisholm and a lot of government members, particularly in Victoria, about the $2.2 billion they've committed to the Victorian Suburban Rail Loop. But you will not heard from any member of this government that that project has not gone through the independent assessment by Infrastructure Australia. When they were in opposition there was plenty of talk about how important Infrastructure Australia was, but once again they say one thing when in opposition and do another thing when in government. The Prime Minister himself when he was the opposition leader said in his budget reply speech in March:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Labor will make sure that those investments really stack up using the Infrastructure Australia model that I established.</para></quote>
<para>Less than six months into this government he has already thrown that out the window. I wonder why he has changed his mind on this $2.2 billion, for a project that is expected to cost up to $125 billion and to be completed by 2085. Why has he rushed this through on such a big and significant project? Could it be that his barbecue friend Premier Daniel Andrews has an election in two to three weeks? Could it be that? As they say, what a coincidence. Once again this Prime Minister is playing politics with taxpayers' money to support his friend Daniel Andrews.</para>
<para>It's very similar to his broken promise of a $275 cut to power bills that we know is not going to happen. The Albanese government boasted in this budget about the savings they're going to make, but again they didn't talk about the majority of these savings coming from deferred or cancelled projects, whether they are road or rail. These deferred projects impact people. That is what has been lost in this by those opposite when they laud these decisions—like indefinitely delaying the Rockhampton Ring Road. It is pulling the rug out from underneath nearly 1,000 workers who were prepared and reliant on starting work in January next year, two or three months away. Their lives have been changed. You don't hear about that from those opposite. The ring road group came to Canberra today wanting action. I hope the Albanese government will at least have the decency to listen to these residents and workers who are impacted by this.</para>
<para>Of the upgrades that have been announced and noted in the bill, many have been re-announced by the Albanese government. These projects were already put in place by the coalition, including the Bruce Highway upgrade in Queensland and the nearly $700 million allocated for the Outback Way. The government is cancelling these infrastructure projects and is cancelling the Building Better Regions program without even looking at it. Community groups have invested time, money and effort in putting their applications in in good faith. This government cancelled every application, costing them that time and money. They are going to launch a new program. I dare say it will be very similar, if not identical, to the current program but they need to get their political spin by costing community groups time and money. Those community groups were relying on that fund to deliver their projects. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Israel</title>
          <page.no>123</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LEESER</name>
    <name.id>109556</name.id>
    <electorate>Berowra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Israel, as a sovereign state, is free to decide its own capital; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) for the last 3,000 years Jerusalem has not been the capital of any state other than a Jewish state, and has been the seat of government of Israel since 1950;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) recognises that the territory of West Jerusalem:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) has been part of Israel's sovereign territory since the state was established in 1948, and is not part of the territory which Israel captured during the 1967 war;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) is therefore outside the scope of United Nations (UN) resolutions since 1967, which are limited expressly to territory occupied by Israel since 1967; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) has never been the subject of peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) further notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2018 did not in any way pre-empt the outcome of peace negotiations, or undermine the prospects of achieving a peaceful settlement of the conflict based on the UN-endorsed principle of two states for two peoples; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) since 2020 four Arab states have officially normalised relations with Israel, thereby disproving claims which were made in 2018 that recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital would worsen the conflict; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) reverse its recent decision to no longer recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) apologise to the Australian people for the lack of consultation or opportunity for public debate in the lead-up to the decision, and for effecting an important change of government policy through an amendment to a government website, and then officially denying the change, before a decision was taken by the Cabinet;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) apologise to Israel for this ill-considered decision, and the hasty and careless manner in which it was made; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) apologise to the Australian Jewish community for the failure to consult and for announcing its decision on the Jewish Holy Day of Simchat Torah, when Jewish community organisations were precluded from responding.</para></quote>
<para>I spent the last week in Israel, the Palestinian territories and the United Arab Emirates. The original purpose of my visit was to examine how the Abraham Accords are changing the Middle East for the better. The Abraham Accords put to death two canards of this debate: first, that there can be no peace between Israel and its Arab neighbours while the Israel-Palestinian issue remains unresolved; and second, that the central problem in the Middle East is Israel-Palestine. It's not. The real challenge in the Middle East is the export of terrorism and regional destabilisation by Iran, and the prevalence of failed states like Syria and Lebanon, which are being picked over by a range of terrorist organisations like ISIS and the Iranian-backed Hezbollah. Unfortunately, rather than celebrating the Abraham Accords, I was constantly having to confront the real sense of hurt that Israelis have about the Australian government's decision to reverse our policy on Jerusalem. Make no mistake, this was big news in Israel and it has damaged our relationship with a significant ally and the only democracy in the Middle East. I explained this was not a bipartisan decision and that a future coalition government will revert to recognising West Jerusalem as the capital.</para>
<para>Labor's decision-making was shambolic and wrong. Labor had three positions on this issue in 24 hours. There was no consultation with Israel, and the decision was announced on Simchat Torah. It is hard to think of a more chaotic piece of foreign policy-making in Australia. It was a decision that sends a bad message to all other countries with whom we have long-standing alliances and friendships. The decision was lauded by Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad. You know you're making bad decisions when they are endorsed by listed terrorist organisations like those.</para>
<para>West Jerusalem has been part of Israel since 1948. It looks like every other capital city in the world. The Knesset—Israel's parliament—is there, the Supreme Court is there, the Prime Minister lives there and the President lives there. West Jerusalem is not a final status issue. I want to address the government's three justifications for its decision. First, they say the decision to not recognise Jerusalem had been the position of every government between 1967 and 2018. The simple answer to this proposition is to say that the previous policy was wrong. It was a pointless charade and, to me as a Jewish Australian, it was an offensive form of anti-Semitism, singling Israel out by pretending its capital was somewhere other than it actually was, which was finally corrected by the Morrison government. But when the correct decision has been made by an Australian government, it is no justification for the succeeding government to revert to the previous offensive position by saying that the correct position was out of step with those governments who were in error.</para>
<para>Second, Labor argue that the decision was out of step with a range of countries including France, Spain, South Korea, New Zealand, Germany, Japan, the EU, Singapore, Canada, the UK, Sweden, Finland and Norway. Well, Australia has its own independent foreign policy based on facts, principles and our national interest; it is not some form of groupthink. Third, they described the Morrison government's announcement as a political stunt. It was not a stunt; it was a policy decision made in an orthodox manner. Over two months between making the announcement that the government was considering recognising West Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the final decision, there were consultations led by the secretaries of PM&C, DFAT and Home Affairs. Community representatives and people closely involved in the Middle East peace process were involved. Prime Minister Morrison raised the issue with other world leaders personally in bilateral meetings. Compare that process with Labor's shambolic approach and one can only conclude that the reversal of this decision came about to appease extreme elements in the ALP.</para>
<para>On Israel, Labor speaks with a forked tongue. Before the election, Labor promised they were in lockstep with the coalition. The Attorney-General wrote in the <inline font-style="italic">Australian </inline><inline font-style="italic">Jewish News</inline>:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australia has for generations spoken with one voice in support of Israel. Labor’s own history of steadfast support for Israel extends back to well before the founding of the modern state in 1948.</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">… … …</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">The truth is that you do not have to look far to see the reality, and value, of bipartisanship when it comes to Israel.</para></quote>
<para>Well, it took only a few months for Labor to demonstrate this was untrue. As Peter Wertheim from the Executive Council of Australian Jewry pointed out, the ECAJ's pre-election survey asked:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Please outline your party's policies on the recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital, including any additional measures it would take if elected to government.</para></quote>
<para>In their answer, the position Labor put to the Jewish community going into the election made no mention that it would cease to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. As Peter Wertheim has written:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Significantly, there was no statement as previously, that Labor would reverse the Morrison government's decision. Was this misleading? It was certainly less than full disclosure.</para></quote>
<para>It's time for the Albanese government to reverse their decision. If they don't, then the next coalition government will. Australia should not be making foreign policy in such a chaotic way, particularly when that policy alienates longstanding allies like Israel.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>E0D</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Violi</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms TEMPLEMAN</name>
    <name.id>181810</name.id>
    <electorate>Macquarie</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I welcome the opportunity to speak on this motion but not in support of it. It provides an opportunity in this place to restate the government's commitment to a two-state solution for Palestine and Israel and for there to be calm and thoughtful discussion rather than political pointscoring. I speak on this issue knowing how easily my words can be extracted and manipulated. I think it's in everyone's interests—particularly those who are suffering the consequences of a system that divides and segregates people depending on whether they're Jewish or Muslim—that we retain the context in which comments are made. We do need to recall the history that has led to us returning to a longstanding policy not to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, nor to have an intent to move our embassy to West Jerusalem.</para>
<para>While the timing and manner of the announcement was regrettable, it's a long-held Australian government policy. Since 1948, when the state of Israel was founded, successive Australian governments, no matter whether they were Labor or coalition, had a policy of not recognising West Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Until 2018, there was a strong bipartisanship on this matter. The Morrison government decision to reject bipartisanship followed a decision by then US President Donald Trump to recognise West Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2017 and then to move the US embassy there the following year. In the heat of the Wentworth by-election, triggered by the resignation of former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister Morrison's decision to follow Trump's lead was announced. It was a decision dropped to the media by the Prime Minister on the same day he told the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and only a day after he told his foreign minister. I note that, in spite of a big splash announcement, the fine print recognised that the embassy would not actually move from Tel Aviv.</para>
<para>I have no interest in playing people against one another. My respect for both the Jewish community and the Palestinian people remains strong. Australia has always been a steadfast friend of Israel, being one of the first countries to formally recognise Israel under Labor Prime Minister Ben Chifley. We have long supported Palestinians, including by providing humanitarian support. Australia's development cooperation is a demonstration of our practical and genuine commitment to the Palestinian people and a recognition of the economic, health, education and social disadvantages they face.</para>
<para>But there is a desperate need to re-engage in the peace process. In the last month, a UN Middle East envoy said 2022 is looking to be the deadliest year for Palestinians living in the West Bank since the UN began keeping records of fatalities 17 years ago, with 32 Palestinians, including six children, killed by Israeli forces in the last month and 311 injured, while two Israeli forces personnel were killed and 25 Israeli civilians were injured by Palestinians. It is no wonder the Palestinian UN ambassador has urged the Security Council to do more to protect and promote the two-state solution.</para>
<para>In this motion, the member for Berowra states that:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2018 did not in any way pre-empt the outcome of peace negotiations, or undermine the prospects of achieving a peaceful settlement of the conflict based on the UN-endorsed principle of two states for two peoples …</para></quote>
<para>I see it differently. The Morrison government policy change caused conflict and distress, all for an attempt at short-term political game playing domestically. The status of Jerusalem, including West Jerusalem, is a final status issue that should be resolved as part of any peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian people.</para>
<para>Having visited Jerusalem in 2017 and walked that maze of narrow alleyways in the old quarter, having seen the history that fills its four quarters—Christian, Muslim, Jewish and Armenian—and having visited some of the city's most revered and holy sites, I know that this place should not be subject to snap political decisions during a by-election on the other side of the world. On that visit, many Jewish, Christian and Muslim leaders stressed to me their desire for peace and to be able to live side by side. So I support our decision on West Jerusalem, and lest there be any doubt let me restate: we support the recognition and right of Israel and Palestine to exist as two states within secure and internationally recognised borders.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr FLETCHER</name>
    <name.id>L6B</name.id>
    <electorate>Bradfield</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am very pleased to rise to strongly support this motion calling on the government to reverse its recent decision to no longer recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and to apologise to the Australian people, to Israel and to the Australian Jewish community. This motion is necessary because of a shockingly poorly executed and fundamentally ill judged decision by the government. On 17 October, media reported that the Department of Foreign Affairs website had removed references to the recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the commitment to move the embassy. A spokesman for Foreign Minister Penny Wong was asked for clarification and had this to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">The former Government made the decision to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. No decision to change that has been made by the current government.</para></quote>
<para>The very next day, the foreign minister announced at a press conference that Australia would reverse the recognition of West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.</para>
<para>Extraordinarily and insultingly, the announcement occurred on the Jewish holy day of Simhath Torah and just two weeks before an election in Israel. The Minister for Foreign Affairs did not demonstrate how this abrupt reversal of position was in the national interest, and, indeed, what was particularly troubling about this decision was that it treated so many stakeholders with contempt. The Israeli ambassador was not informed of the decision before the announcement; the Israeli government was not informed. Israel's Prime Minister Lapid had this to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In light of the way in which this decision was made in Australia, as a hasty response to an incorrect report in the media, we can only hope that the Australian government manages other matters more seriously and professionally.</para></quote>
<para>The Israeli government summonsed Australia's ambassador to Israel to explain the government's change in policy.</para>
<para>The Executive Council of Australia Jewry said the decision was made in 'a shoddy manner', was 'poor policy' and was 'no way to treat an ally'. It's interesting to note that members of the government themselves expressed disappointment, as did a former Labor member of this place, Michael Danby, who said the government's decision was 'chaotic' and 'unprofessional'. Of course, this decision was welcomed by some—by two listed terrorist organisations: Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The Albanese Labor government has chosen to give comfort to those organisations at the same time as treating longstanding friends of Australia very poorly.</para>
<para>During the last election campaign, there was no mention by Labor of its plan to reverse this policy. On the contrary, elected senior Labor parliamentarians assured concerned stakeholders that, on the question of Israel, it didn't matter which way they voted. The now Attorney-General wrote in the Australian Jewish News, claiming that across domestic politics Australia 'spoke with one voice', and the member for Macnamara made similar claims on 18 March in the Australian Jewish News, saying that Australia's Jewish community should feel proud that its interests would be safeguarded 'irrespective of whoever forms government'. I have seen no apology from either the Attorney-General or the member for Macnamara for their involvement in this shameful misleading of a significant and respected community—the Australian Jewish community.</para>
<para>I contrast this very poor process with the careful process our former government followed in 2018. Then Prime Minister Morrison announced in December 2018 the decision that the Australian government would recognise West Jerusalem, the seat of the Knesset and many of the institutions of the government of Israel, as the capital of Israel, a decision which, of course, respected both a commitment to a two-state solution and longstanding respect for relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The then government committed to moving the Australian embassy to West Jerusalem when practical, in support of and after the final status determination of a two-state solution.</para>
<para>In making this decision, Australia acknowledged the aspirations of the Palestinian people for a future state with its capital in East Jerusalem, and the announcement was made following a detailed review and extensive consultation by the secretaries of the departments of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Foreign Affairs and Trade, Defence, and Home Affairs. The decision that the current government made recently was badly executed. It was fundamentally wrong. The coalition has no hesitation in calling on the government to reverse it.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:26</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr ZAPPIA</name>
    <name.id>HWB</name.id>
    <electorate>Makin</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I begin by commending the comments of the member for Macquarie a few moments ago. This matter was raised in a matter of public importance in the House of Representatives only a couple of weeks ago. It got no traction then, and this motion won't get any traction either. It won't get any traction, because the facts with respect to this whole issue are absolutely clear.</para>
<para>The decision initially by the Morrison government to relocate the Australian embassy to West Jerusalem and to follow in the footsteps of the USA was nothing but a cynical political manoeuvre in the lead-up to the Wentworth by-election in 2018—a manoeuvre which ultimately failed. After it failed, the Morrison government backed down on its decision anyway, and the embassy has remained in Tel Aviv ever since.</para>
<para>As the Minister for Foreign Affairs quite rightly pointed out in her press statement of October this year:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Today the Government has reaffirmed Australia's previous and longstanding position that Jerusalem is a final status issue that should be resolved as part of any peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian people.</para></quote>
<para>The statement goes on to say:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Australia's embassy has always been, and remains, in Tel Aviv.</para></quote>
<para>From some quick research I did, there are some 90 embassies in Israel, and 86 of them are in Tel Aviv. The four that are not include the American embassy and three other countries that have followed, obviously, in American footsteps. But 86 are in Tel Aviv, which means the global opinion is that that's where they ought to be.</para>
<para>I won't go into quotes from Australian Labor Party leaders over the years, but I'll quote from some of the Liberal leaders over the 70 or so years since the embassy was first established there. Prime Minister Howard, Prime Minister Abbott and Prime Minister Turnbull all accepted Tel Aviv as the place for the Australian embassy to be. Liberal Prime Minister Howard in a joint press conference with PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat in May 2000 said:</para>
<para>The statu s of Jerusalem is something that will be resolved by the parties in the discussion.</para>
<para>In other words, there needs to be further dialogue on that very issue. Liberal Foreign Minister Bishop said plainly, too:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Matters relating to Jerusalem are subject to final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.</para></quote>
<para>Even the Gorton government after the 1967 agreement did not recognise anything else but that.</para>
<para>It seems to me that, if you go through the decades, one government after the other in this country—in particular Liberal or coalition governments—have consistently accepted that Tel Aviv is the capital of Israel and that that's where our embassy should be. It was only the cynical attempt by the Morrison government that sought to change that.</para>
<para>When members opposite now come into the chamber and talk about the manoeuvres of this government, can I say: it was their own government that made a decision without, I understand, their foreign minister of the day even being aware, without any consultation and without any advice from the very departments that they should have sought advice from if they were going to make such a move. It is absolutely clear that it was a decision made with one purpose and one purpose only, and that was to try and win over the Jewish vote in the Wentworth by-election—a manoeuvre which not only failed then but ultimately resulted in the Morrison government having to reverse its own position on the matter.</para>
<para>The Labor Party and the government well understand that the position with respect to Jerusalem is one that will require a great deal of negotiation into the future. It is a matter that we understand is very important to both Israel and the Palestinian people. And it's a matter that will only be resolved by negotiation and dialogue. It won't be resolved by political tactics in this place, similar to those used by the Morrison government in 2018 and which are now being used again to try and justify this confected outrage about Labor's decision to simply do what has been done from day one, and that is to recognise Tel Aviv as the capital of Jerusalem, and that's where our embassy should be.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr HAWKE</name>
    <name.id>HWO</name.id>
    <electorate>Mitchell</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to support this motion from my colleague the member for Berowra and to respond to some of the things that we're hearing from the Australian Labor Party and the government. Australia's voice internationally is well regarded. It's recognised as a voice for human and individual rights. And of course it speaks regularly, in a minority sense, for these high-moral-ground positions. The member for Makin is better than the argument that the Labor Party is making in saying that, because a majority thinks something, Australia should just do that. A majority of countries today—a newsflash for the Labor Party—deny Israel's right to exist. They have anti-Semitism embedded in their cultures and their thinking. Does that mean Australia's voice should join with a so-called majority of countries that happen to think that way? I don't believe so.</para>
<para>Thankfully, as a Western country, as a country dedicated to principles of freedom and individual human rights and liberty, Australia's voice has always been on the side of individual human rights, and it has stood strongly for Israel from the beginning of the modern nation of Israel because we understand that it has a right to exist—a right denied by many countries today. For the Labor Party to argue that we should join with the majority who happen to be wrong—morally wrong; reprehensibly wrong—about something, objectively, and that we should not be in a minority on human rights because human rights violators say that Israel should not exist, I think is fundamentally a weak argument and a weak position.</para>
<para>Further, for the Labor Party to suggest that, because they believe there was a political tactic a few years ago and, now they're in government, that's the reason they have made this change, is fundamentally incorrect as well. This is Labor's longstanding platform and belief. I accept that. This is not because of a political tactic by the Morrison government. It is embedded within the Labor Party. It is a dark chapter in the Labor Party's modern history—their attitude towards Israel and, subsequently, towards the Jewish people. It is a dark chapter. The evidence in Australia is compelling. It is growing. And I know that many of the members opposite feel strongly about this as well—that this dark chapter in the Labor Party's modern history does need to be tempered, because it is getting out of control. It is getting out of control now, when the government, with no consultation, makes this announcement. And they know full well the impact, diplomatically, this will have. This is not about Tel Aviv versus Jerusalem.</para>
<para>The member for Makin took us on a modern history lesson, but here's an ancient history lesson. From any cursory examination of Middle Eastern history, people understand why the issue of Jerusalem is so important to the Jewish people and why it will always be central to the Jewish religion and the state of Israel and its construct.</para>
<para>So, just because a number of countries say: 'We don't recognise your right to exist,' Australia should not join those voices. We believe they are wrong. We believe in the right principle: of standing setting up for a two-state solution. That has been the guiding principle of peace in the Middle East and the Australian government's position for a long time. And I don't believe it should change.</para>
<para>It is now being adjusted by the Labor Party—and it is being adjusted and undermined. They understand the timing and the impact this will have.</para>
<para>If the United States of America, regardless of who the president was, decided to take a bold step in favour of human and individual rights and the right for Israel to exist, then I believe Australia was right to support them and endorse them. I've always thought that. I've always believed it. From my studies in Middle Eastern history at university, I've always felt that Israel has a right to exist, that the Jewish people have a right to self-determination and that a two-state solution is the only basis for peace in the Middle East. It's the commonsense position, it's the position the United Nations endorses and it's something that should not be subject to politics—as members opposite have said. They know the impact of unravelling this. They understand that this is going to have a negative impact in the community.</para>
<para>The way it was done was brutal, and I understand that this does give licence to those in the Labor Party—and I don't mean the members opposite—who are part of the dark chapter in the modern Labor Party. The Jewish community in Australia knows it. Any casual observer know it. And we need to send signals to those people that they are not to be given licence to further unravel what is a consistent and reasonable policy position for Australia to take, which is that a two-state solution is best.</para>
<para>That's why I strongly support this motion from my colleague the member for Berowra. He and the member for Bradfield are people who are standing up. Many of the new members who've come from the teal side in the seats: listen to the voices of the people who represent these seats and listen to the voices of the community here in Australia. Our relationship with Israel and the Jewish people is so strong, so well rounded and so developed. We should not compromise that because Labor has some people within it who want to change the course of Australian history.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr FREELANDER</name>
    <name.id>265979</name.id>
    <electorate>Macarthur</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There's been a Jewish community in Australia since the very first days of European settlement, and I'm very proud that I'm descended from a Jewish community that came here in convict days. It's very important to me that our relationship with Israel is maintained on a positive note and that we continue to support Israel not just in its existence but in its growth as a 21st-century democracy. So I believe in the State of Israel.</para>
<para>However, those opposite would seek to undermine our relationship with the State of Israel by their unbelievably cynical approach to the issue of Jerusalem. It's worth noting a little bit of history. The State of Israel was first proclaimed by Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, in May 1948. Australia recognised the State of Israel in January 1949 and our embassy in Israel has been in Tel Aviv from that time. The Israeli embassy was established in Canberra at the same time—1949.</para>
<para>Those opposite are correct when they say that Jerusalem has incredible significance. It has incredible significance to Islam, to Christianity and to the Jewish people—and any dealing with the issue of Jerusalem has to take that into account. The way in which this has been politicised, initially by the Morrison government and, more recently, by those opposite—who can't even make up their mind and won't even give an opinion about what should happen to Australia's embassy in Israel—is nothing short of astounding. They are approaching issues in a cynical, political, manipulative and inappropriate way.</para>
<para>I fully support the Labor government and the Minister for Foreign Affairs in their decision to rescind the Morrison government's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital and decision to move the embassy there. It was insulting to our Arab colleagues, it reduced the chances of there being a two-state solution, it implied a less than even-handed approach to peace in the Middle East and it reduced us to being little more than a vassal state of a Trumpian America. We should be ashamed of what happened, not celebrating it. Penny Wong and the Australia Labor government have made the right decision, there is no question. Labor has supported the State of Israel since the founding of the state and the initial appointment by Doc Evatt as the head of the UN Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestinian Question. Every opposition leader and Prime Minister from every Labor opposition and government ever since has supported the State of Israel. That is how it should be. That's what I believe in. I believe in a decent, even handed approach. I believe in the hope of eventual peace. The only realistic prospect of that is with a two-state solution.</para>
<para>Nothing makes me more disgusted with the cynical approach of the previous government than this issue. I believe, as Bob Hawke says, that, when the bell tolls for Israel, it tolls for all of us. Israel is an outstanding liberal democracy in the Middle East. They have at the present time a very conservative government and one that I don't always agree with, but I believe in the State of Israel. The only way that we as a government should be dealing with that is with an even handed approach. Even the Lowy Institute notes that the actions of the previous government, the Morrison government, were totally wrong and totally cynical.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>12:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SPENDER</name>
    <name.id>286042</name.id>
    <electorate>Wentworth</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise and support the motion moved by the member for Berowra. The government's decision to withdraw recognition of West Jerusalem was rushed and badly handled. It was poorly timed and without proper consultation. It ignores the fact that West Jerusalem has never been contested in any peace negotiations, and it has undermined our ability to play a constructive role in supporting a peaceful two-state resolution, which is so vital for the Israeli and Palestinian people. It is a decision the government should reverse and apologise for.</para>
<para>I want to make clear that I am a strong supporter for a two-state solution in the Middle East. I hope to see successful Israeli and Palestinian states living side by side in peace in my lifetime. Australia is home to refugees and migrants from across the region and from all sides of this dreadful conflict. Many of these people live and work in Wentworth, and so my community understands more than many the damage that this ongoing conflict has done and the important role that Australia must play in creating a peaceful future. Like so many people in Wentworth and across Australia, I have deep concern for the Palestinian people's suffering, and I unequivocally support them, but at the same time I unequivocally support Israel's right to exist in peace. But that does not mean I support all actions of the Israeli government. We must have peace, and all sides must play their part in creating it.</para>
<para>It has therefore never been more important to take actions that promote an enduring two-state solution in the Middle East. Unfortunately, the government's recent decision does not help. I'm deeply disappointed by the decision itself and by the process followed to make it. Labor has acknowledged that this decision was badly handled. Jewish community representatives were informed by the government on Monday 17 November that there would be no withdrawal of recognition. The next day the government did exactly the opposite. To make matters worse, the decision was announced on a Jewish holy day, meaning community leaders could not respond. It was poorly handled at the diplomatic level. The government of course has the right to change policy, and I recognise that in opposition Labor had expressed these views, but it's also fair to expect the government to consult with communities and work respectfully with other countries even if it's a policy that the other country may not like.</para>
<para>Sadly, this is not the first time that this issue has been poorly handled by the Australian government. Let's be honest: Scott Morrison's decision to bring the Israeli capital into the 2018 Wentworth by-election was a cynical political decision designed to win votes on the day before my community went to the polls. But, whilst the former government's decision was cynically timed, I do believe it is right for Australia to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. West Jerusalem has been part of Israel since 1948, when the country was established. It has never been contested in any peace negotiations. Its status has never been on the table. It has always been within the green line and is not part of the territories which Israel occupied in the 1967 war. There has never been a resolution at the UN calling on Israel to withdraw from West Jerusalem. It is not a contested space. Finally, there is no clear evidence that Australia's recognition of West Jerusalem has, in any way, undermined peace negotiations, as has been alleged by others. In fact, since 2018 when Australia took this action, five Arab states have officially normalised relationships with Israel.</para>
<para>We cannot pretend that the road to peace is a straightforward one, and we must acknowledge that there will be missed steps and false starts along the way. But the difficulty of the issues at hand does not excuse the blunder that the government has made. We must and we can do better.</para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 12:45 to 16: 12</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</title>
        <page.no>129</page.no>
        <type>STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hells Gates Dam</title>
          <page.no>129</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr KATTER</name>
    <name.id>HX4</name.id>
    <electorate>Kennedy</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I secured $48 million, when I had a bit of a balance of power, to draw up an updated engineering plan with costings for Hells Gates Dam. The LNP gave this money—mine—$48 million, to Townsville Enterprise. They drew up not the Hells Gates but their Hells Gates, and there is one hell of a difference between that and the Hells Gates agreed to and designed by Dr JC Bradfield himself and agreed to by Malcolm Fraser, Prime Minister; by Premier Jo Bjelke-Petersen; by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd; by Premier Peter Beattie; and by Sir Leo Hielscher, one of the greatest citizens of our worthy nation—that was the Hells Gates. But they dreamed up a little, a Lilliputian, LNP Hells Gates.</para>
<para>What it does is to destroy the dream of the Australian people to irrigate inland outback Australia—to take a little bit of water from where it rains all the time and put it out there where there are droughts all the time, in heartbreak country. The scheme protected Ingham from the double flood which would have put the whole town under 30 feet of water, delivered the cheapest and most adequate water supply of any city in Australia in Townsville and delivered to Ayr 100,000 hectares of irrigation. All of that was destroyed by— <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Australian Conservation Foundation: Children's Art Competition</title>
          <page.no>130</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:14</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLI</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>NG () (): I'd like to draw attention to the Australian Conservation Foundation's children's art competition called Wild at Art. It encourages school children aged between five and 12 to create an original artwork of one of Australia's threatened species. In Solomon, Henry submitted a portrait of the Arafura snake-eyed skink, Therese painted a very happy dusky hopping mouse, 11-year-old Maggie drew an excellent regent honeyeater and 10-year-old Maeve painted a Gouldian finch. Seven-year-old Shanzay submitted a painting of the mask faced owl and wrote:</para>
<quote><para class="block">People are clearing the land where they live. If you chop down the trees, they won't be able to find a home and live happily. If we don't protect the masked owl then they won't have babies and there won't be more owls.</para></quote>
<para>The ACF has done a great job of promoting awareness of endangered species. This competition is a fantastic way to get kids involved in their future environment. Australia is home to a diverse range of species not found anywhere else in the world. I thank these young Territorians, their parents and their teachers.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Domestic and Family Violence</title>
          <page.no>130</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:15</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILKIE</name>
    <name.id>C2T</name.id>
    <electorate>Clark</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australia's welfare system was created to provide a safety net for our most vulnerable, but for thousands of Australians experiencing domestic violence, outdated social security law is actually making their situation even more dangerous. For instance, survivors of domestic violence, usually women, are pursued by Centrelink for the debts caused by their abusive partners—for example, a perpetrator uses violence to force a survivor into providing incorrect information about their relationship or his income and then forces her to hand over her Centrelink payments—in other words, the survivor never gets a cent but must repay the debt.</para>
<para>Making things worse, current legislation doesn't allow for such debts to be waived, which is why, in 2017, I introduced the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Relieving Domestic Violence Victims of Debt) Bill to enable such debts to be waived—not that it was supported by Liberal or Labor. Moreover, Centrelink assesses payments by relationship status, which means that a person trying to flee domestic violence can't access Centrelink payments if they're considered a member of a couple and her abusive partner is earning over $1,000 a week. This forces survivors to be financially dependent on their abuser at the crucial time when they're deciding whether to stay or to leave, all of which is so very wrong on so many levels. It needs to be fixed and fixed urgently.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Petition: People with Disability</title>
          <page.no>130</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I stand here in support of my community to present a petition on behalf of residents who have requested financial assistance for those suffering with epilepsy. Those who are not able to receive disability support are having to pay for all their own medication, doctor's appointments, dietary needs, transportation and seizure warning systems, all of which are a requirement to keep seizures under control. In addition, the side effects of medication, both physically and emotionally, can have a great impact on their everyday lives and, I'm advised, can also make working in an employed capacity almost impossible.</para>
<para>The petition as presented highlights the importance of desperately needed financial assistance in order to effectively help those living with epilepsy to maintain a healthy lifestyle, as many within our communities live with the condition throughout their whole lives. Times are tough right now, and seizure control is the key to keeping people healthy. However, unfortunately, many people cannot afford the recommended ketogenic diet, which has proven to be helpful for epilepsy and seizure control. Petitioners have requested that the government provide financial assistance to those with epilepsy who are experiencing a cost of living that is so much higher than others'. I know many within my local community do suffer with epilepsy, and I fully understand their request for this financial assistance given the pressure and impact on their day-to-day living.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Are you seeking to table a petition?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, I have the petition here.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Has the petition been approved by the Standing Committee on Petitions?</para>
</interjection>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms ROBERTS</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, it has.</para>
</continue>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Thank you for that. Tabling is agreed to.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">The petition read as follows—</inline></para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para class="italic"> <inline font-style="italic">The document was unavailable at the time of publishing</inline></para>
<para> </para>
<para> </para>
<para>Petition received.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>La Trobe Electorate: Roads</title>
          <page.no>131</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:19</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WOOD</name>
    <name.id>E0F</name.id>
    <electorate>La Trobe</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I cannot believe how much the Labor federal government and Prime Minister Albanese hate the people of the Dandenong Ranges and the hills, because today I found out that in the last federal budget they scrapped $300 million to seal the unsealed roads through the Dandenong Ranges, from suburbs such as Emerald, Cockatoo, Gembrook, Beaconsfield, Beaconsfield Upper, Avonsleigh, Mt Burnett, Guys Hill, Maryknoll, Clematis, Menzies Creek, Pakenham Upper and going across the Yarra Ranges. In total, the funding would have provided for 110 kilometres of unsealed roads being sealed in the Cardinia Shire and 187 in the Yarra Ranges. This goes on top of scrapping $110 million for the Wellington Road upgrade, a vital section of road which needed to be upgraded for those residents to escape in the event of a bushfire, and it's already such a dangerous road.</para>
<para>I make the point that on 3 May 2019 former Labor opposition leader Bill Shorten and Labor candidate Simon Curtis said in the <inline font-style="italic">S</inline><inline font-style="italic">tar</inline><inline font-style="italic"> Mail</inline>newspaper article titled 'Bipartisan funding for roads' that $110 million would go towards upgrades to Wellington Road, and $300 million would go to sealing roads in the Dandenong Ranges and the surrounding suburbs. It is an absolute disgrace that the hills are being targeted by Labor. Take them out of the state seat of Monbulk. Put a Liberal there.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hunter Electorate: New South Wales State Emergency Service</title>
          <page.no>131</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>There is no doubt the New South Wales SES do amazing work in our community, and that's especially evident this year. On behalf of everyone in the Hunter: thank you for your service. You tireless, countless hours of volunteering do not go unrecognised. We are extremely lucky to have such incredible volunteers in our community. The New South Wales SES recently came together to celebrate the dedicated service of 22 members from the Hunter Valley who, between them, have over 360 years of volunteering experience.</para>
<para>Thank you to Dr Bob Drewer for 50 years of service and Graeme Silver for 40 years of service. Robyn Barco received a commissioner's certificate of appreciation. Greg Gunter, Peter Sherwen, Simone Burrows and Shaun Farmer received National Emergency Medals for deploying to help in Cyclone Debbie. Richard Fellows and Andrew Pain received the National Medal for 30 years of service. Ben Maxwell, Judith Felton, Debra Healy and Michael Pitkin have 15 years of service. Tim Miller received the SES Long Service Medal for 35 years of service. Terry Purser, Greg Gunter, Noel Dipple and Simon Merrick have 20 years of service. Michael Mifsud, Pamela Sharp, Peter Sherwen and Tracey Martin have 10 years of service. Congratulations to you all. We in the Hunter appreciate everything you do and thank you very much.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Brunswick Show</title>
          <page.no>131</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mrs MARINO</name>
    <name.id>HWP</name.id>
    <electorate>Forrest</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I want to congratulate the Brunswick Agricultural Society for another fabulous Brunswick Show. I thank the president, Julianne Hill; her committee; the army of volunteers who make this happen; all the community groups that help out and benefit from this; and the actual beneficiaries, who are the broader community. Over 22,000 people attended this wonderful one-day show. This year the featured group was celebrating rural emergency services, the majority of whom are our wonderful volunteers in our communities. Last year the Clarabelle cow auction raised $120,000 for Solaris Cancer Care. This year, the beneficiary of that auction was the Royal Flying Doctor Service.</para>
<para>There was a spotlight on WA's ag sector, which is fantastic. In WA that's an $11 billion sector. We saw quality cattle shown, whether it was in the dairy section or in the beef section. There was a fantastic timber industry display, and, by gee, they've got some amazing gear that helps not only with the timber itself but also with managing bushfires. There was the fantastic meat marquee, and you really wanted to be in that space. Then we have log chops, fireworks, the displays—</para>
<para>Sitting suspende d from 16 : 23 to 16 : 36</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Hawke Electorate: Djerriwarrh Festival</title>
          <page.no>131</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:36</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAE</name>
    <name.id>300122</name.id>
    <electorate>Hawke</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Over the weekend my family and I joined thousands of other local families in Melton at the Djerriwarrh Festival. It was the first time the event has been held since 2019. As always, the event kicked off with a street parade, this year themed 'celebrate today, imagine the future'. It was fantastic to see so many community groups coming together to march, including the local primary schools, cultural groups and sporting clubs. The kids wearing amazing homemade robot costumes were a particular highlight.</para>
<para>It was also wonderful to see our emergency services staff and volunteers at the march, providing all of us with an opportunity to show our appreciation and celebrate all that they do for our community, particularly after the wild weather we've had in Victoria. After the opening parade the whole town was buzzing with excitement, with a carnival put on by the local Lions Club; a market with unique, locally made products; an interactive arts workshop; and plenty more.</para>
<para>With a stellar performance from Aussie rock band Eskimo Joe to finish up, the event was a raging success and a demonstration of the immense community spirit found in Melton. Thank you to all of the volunteers who contributed to the event and to the local traders for their patience with road closures. I look forward to seeing the Djerriwarrh Festival back again in 2023.</para>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Queensland Tourism Awards</title>
          <page.no>132</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:38</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr WILLCOX</name>
    <name.id>286535</name.id>
    <electorate>Dawson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Dawson is the tourism envy of the nation. We have the Whitsundays—74 beautiful islands—the Great Barrier Reef, the tropics and, importantly, countless talented and brilliant tourism operators to showcase it all. This week the Queensland Tourism Awards had Dawson featuring on the podium right across the board, and I am proud of them all.</para>
<para>Coming in at the top spot for best new tourism business was Mackay's Wildcat cruises, giving an incredible above- and below-water experience. The best caravan and holiday park winner went to BIG4 Adventure Whitsunday Resort, a must for families with young kids. In Airlie Beach, the best 3 to 3½ star accommodation was awarded to Magnums, who punch well above their weight with gorgeous tropical bungalows fit for a whole range of tourists. And, of course, Ocean Rafting took the top spot for the adventure tourism award. They provide an unforgettable Great Barrier Reef experience. To all those in need of a holiday—perhaps the member for Solomon here, the honourable Luke Gosling; it looks like you need a holiday, sir!—come and visit us in Dawson and see why we are a tourism hotspot.</para>
<para class="italic"><inline font-style="italic">A division having been called in the House of Representatives—</inline></para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 16 : 40 to 16 : 51</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>249710</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I do apologise to members, but in accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
    <debate><debateinfo>
        <title>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</title>
        <page.no>132</page.no>
        <type>PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS</type>
      </debateinfo><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Trade with the European Union</title>
          <page.no>132</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RICK WILSON</name>
    <name.id>198084</name.id>
    <electorate>O'Connor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me enormous pleasure today to stand to speak in support of the motion moved by the member for Page, the shadow minister for trade and tourism.</para>
<para>The European Free Trade Agreement is going to be a critical development in Australia's trading relationship with the rest of the world. The European Union is our second-largest trading partner at the moment, but unfortunately there is a massive trade imbalance, with the European Union exporting a great deal more of its products and goods and services to Australia than we export to them. The total two-way trading partnership is worth $74 billion. The European Union, as a bloc, has a population of 450 million people, a great number of whom are high-income earners who are willing customers. We certainly need to be able to access those customers.</para>
<para>When I was a young farmer growing up in the 1980s, studying economics and marketing at university, the European Union was often used as an example of what not to do when it came to trade. Their international tariffs, particularly in agriculture and agricultural goods, restricted the access of Australian farmers to the European market. It also led to inefficiencies in their own systems and, really, at the end of the day no-one was better off other than some European farmers who received enormous subsidies for their products.</para>
<para>Hopefully, and I'm sure in this modern world, we have moved beyond those old protectionist policies, although I do understand that the European Union are looking to protect some of their industries, farmers and other trades with carbon tariffs. That is certainly something that I'm sure the current government will resist with the utmost vigour when it comes to the negotiations because a tariff—whether it be a carbon tariff or a financial tariff—is a tariff. Free trade agreements are about reducing tariffs, reducing trade barriers and allowing the efficient flow of goods and services throughout the global economy. So carbon tariffs are certainly something that I'm sure an Australian government, of whatever stripe, will never agree to.</para>
<para>I want to talk a bit about the history of the coalition's record in government when it comes to free trade agreements. Since 2013 we had signed 11 free trade agreements, lifting the share of Australia's global trade from 27 per cent in 2013 to 80 per cent by the time we left government in May 2022. The European free trade agreement will lift that number to 90 per cent. I certainly hope that the current government is focused on getting the best outcome and getting on with this deal, because it is a very significant market and will be a very significant deal going forward. I'm looking forward to seeing the government come up with the best possible deal for Australia.</para>
<para>I have a couple of statistics on the European deal. The European Union has a surplus of $23 billion for goods and $14 billion for services exported to our country. That is their surplus. We sell to the EU $4 worth of food per person and they export to Australia $200 worth of food per person. Given that Australia is one of the most self-sufficient food-producing nations in the world, that is a number that is unacceptable. I'm sure that with the upcoming negotiations we will see that number come back into balance.</para>
<para>I want to just touch on some of the numbers that other countries have achieved through their free trade agreements. New Zealand has access for 163,000 tonnes of sheepmeat and Australia has a quota of just over 17,000 tonnes. I mention that in particular because I am a Western Australian representing in this place Western Australian farmers, and our sheepmeat industry is a very important part of the rural landscape. With the current government's policy of phasing out the live export trade we absolutely need access to every market we can get.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>16:56</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr GOSLING</name>
    <name.id>245392</name.id>
    <electorate>Solomon</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The government aims to conclude a comprehensive and ambitious trade agreement with the EU as soon as possible. The Prime Minister brought negotiations back on track during his June visit to Europe. In Madrid the Prime Minister and the EU commission and council presidents committed to making progress on an EU free trade agreement. It was also a key focus of the Minister for Trade and Tourism, Senator Farrell, when he visited Geneva. It was great to see our federal trade minister in Darwin at the Australia Indonesia Business Council meeting where we again talked about trade and getting the most out of the AI-CEPA agreement with Indonesia. But I digress.</para>
<para>The deal with the EU is critical. We would like to have an agreement by mid next year. The latest round of negotiations took place between 17 and 21 October. A trade agreement with the EU would help to diversify our trade relationships and expand opportunities for Australian exporters. This would be a significant free trade agreement, as the member for O'Connor, the previous speaker, said. It is our second-biggest trading group. The EU is a massive high-income market of almost 450 million people, with a GDP of around A$23 trillion. As a bloc the EU is already our second-largest two-way trading partner, as I said, worth about A$74 billion in 2020.</para>
<para>A trade agreement would facilitate greater EU investment in Australia, which of course would support jobs and economic growth. Australia is seeking to lock in access for our service exporters and create opportunities in sectors of key commercial interest, like education, financial and professional services. Our negotiators are also aiming to significantly improve market access for Australian agricultural and industrial products. They will seek to do this within the deal by streamlining customs procedures to improve business confidence. Importantly, they'll negotiate hard to make sure that standards and regulations don't deter trade and create barriers to getting our goods and services into Europe.</para>
<para>Our main goods exported to the EU are coal, gold, oilseeds and professional, ICT and education services. European market access for beef, sheepmeat, rice, sugar and dairy will be very good outcomes for our Australian producers. In its EU trade deal signed in June this year, New Zealand secured duty-free access for 163,769 tonnes of sheepmeat after seven years of entry into force. New Zealand also got a better deal on quotas for beef and dairy and secured some hundreds of millions of New Zealand dollars in savings each year. But Australia's current lack of preferential access to the EU means that our exporters are at a disadvantage compared to many of our biggest competitors like New Zealand. Many of Australia's major exports, particularly agriculture, face prohibitively high tariffs. We also want to create more opportunities for our services and exporters and to grow investment. Australian industry and consumers can be confident that we will drive a hard bargain to achieve an overall agreement to the benefit of our nation. An ambitious trade agreement is the best way to improve our access to the EU and rebalance the current trade flows.</para>
<para>Our government is committed to taking ambitious action on climate change and looks forward to exploring new avenues for cooperation on climate and energy through this deal. A comprehensive and ambitious free trade agreement will strengthen trade and investment links with the EU at a time of great uncertainty around the world.</para>
<para>Russia's invasion of Ukraine has reinforced the value of partnerships with like-minded countries in Europe, and the trade agreement is an opportunity to strengthen our ties and tackle the economic and geopolitical challenges and supply-chain disruptions that are currently facing Europe. We want to be part of the solution. And we are part of the solution, by donating an additional 30 Bushmasters to Ukraine, as Deputy Prime Minister Marles announced last month, bringing our total donation of Bushmasters to 90 vehicles. It was great, in the House today, to be able to acknowledge Chev Viviers and Mark Eggler, who played a great role in the Bushmaster story. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:01</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr VIOLI</name>
    <name.id>300147</name.id>
    <electorate>Casey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise in support of the motion moved by the member for Page on the Australia-European Union Free Trade Agreement. As a trading nation, free trade agreements are crucial to our economic prosperity, allowing countries to import and export goods without any tariffs or other barriers to trade. They drive lower prices for consumers, increased exports, benefits for economies of scale and a greater choice of goods, and they create jobs.</para>
<para>I saw this firsthand at Yarra Valley Snack Foods, when I was responsible for exports into Asia. Opening new markets delivers significant benefits to local businesses, primarily through opening access to new customers and to markets significantly larger than the local Australian market. So let's use food—the industry I was in—as an example. In Australia, two supermarket companies have significant market share. Export markets allow suppliers to not only grow their business but also diversify their market base away from the duopoly of two key customers. This protects the long-term viability of the business. And that is why free trade agreements are so important.</para>
<para>The previous coalition government had a strong record when it came to securing free trade agreements. We recognised the importance of developing trade relationships for economic security, for tourism, for jobs and for business growth. While in government, the coalition had finalised 11 trade agreements since 2013, including those with the UK and India. During our time in government, we lifted the amount of trade covered by free trade agreements from 27 per cent under Labor in 2013 to close to 80 per cent today.</para>
<para>It therefore comes as no surprise that it was the coalition government that initiated the free trade agreement with the European Union by launching negotiations back in 2018. The coalition did this, seeking an ambitious and comprehensive deal to drive Australian exports, contribute to economic growth and create jobs. A well-drafted free trade agreement between Australia and the European Union will assist businesses with post-pandemic economic recovery by providing new opportunities for growth in a significant market. The EU is our second-largest two-way trading partner of goods and services, which were worth $74 billion in 2020. A comprehensive trade deal with the EU will open the doors to a high-income market of almost 450 million people and a GDP of $23 trillion.</para>
<para>While Australia and the EU are natural partners, given our shared commitment to democracy, freedom, the rule of law and free and open markets, developing a free trade agreement will be a real test for Labor. As it stands, the European Union runs a significant trade surplus within Australia because of our 50-year-old trade deal. It is a huge market with great potential for Australian exporting companies. Given the size of the Australian economy, Australian companies and consumers will always benefit from greater choice and lower prices. Free trade agreements provide Australian companies broader access to international markets. They open our markets up to greater competition while offering more prospects for increased two-way investment and reducing the import costs for Australian businesses and consumers, vital in this time of rising prices.</para>
<para>We want and need a trade agreement that sets a benchmark for what can be achieved between like-minded partners. The government must deliver a free trade agreement that increases investment between Australia and the European Union; creates rules to support the digital economy, so vital to driving productivity in our nation; and reduces cost and red tape for small and medium businesses, which are the engine room of the Australian economy. The looming question is whether the Labor government can secure a completely liberalised market, and that is where their focus should be. So I urge the government to support and complete the foundations already established for an Australian European union free trade agreement so we can all grow and prosper as a nation.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PERRETT</name>
    <name.id>HVP</name.id>
    <electorate>Moreton</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It wasn't that long ago that the Australian-European free trade negotiations had stalled, and stalled badly. Whether it was gross disrespect being shown to a close ally, texts being leaked or its value to do anything to address climate change, the Morrison government dropped the ball on Australia's relationship with the EU. Labor has picked up the pill. Thankfully, since the Albanese government took office negotiations are back on track. Negotiations have started once again to gain significant momentum. With the current turmoil in Europe associated with Russia's invasion of Ukraine, it has reinforced the value of partnerships with like-minded countries. A comprehensive and ambitious free trade agreement with the European Union will strengthen trade and investment links in this time of considerable global uncertainty. This EU FTA is an opportunity to strengthen our ties and tackle the economic and geopolitical challenges and supply chain disruptions that are currently facing Europe.</para>
<para>Australia is a trading nation, so we want to be a part of the solution for Europe, and being a part of their solution will deliver significant benefits to our economy, to our miners, to our farmers, to our businesses that provide services. The European Union is massive. Becoming a key partner will help Australia diversify our trade relationships and create new commercial opportunities for Australian exporters. The EU has a potential 450 million customers for Australian exporters to provide goods and services. This trading bloc has a GDP of $23 trillion. The EU is already our third-largest trading partner, which is good, but the goods and services we exchange were worth $83 billion in 2021. It's also our second-largest source of foreign investment in terms of total stocks, worth around $763 billion in 2021.</para>
<para>Right now, our exporters are at a major disadvantage compared to many of our competitors. Agriculture, one of this nation was key export sectors, currently faces prohibitively high tariffs, making it extremely difficult for our farmers to access markets with our high-quality, trusted produce. The Albanese government wants to help our farmers and producers have an equitable playing field when they are competing for EU markets. Who wouldn't want to see more Queensland beef on the supermarket shelves in Germany or more nuts and pulses being used by restaurants in Paris and Amsterdam? We want a successful partnership with Europe to also open up new and greater opportunities for our services exporters as well as grow investment.</para>
<para>Crucial to this partnership is the Albanese government's commitment to addressing climate change. This will mean exploring new avenues for cooperation on climate and energy through mutual understandings and agreement. We have much to learn about embracing renewal energy technology.</para>
<para>We want trading doors to be opened rather than be slammed in the face of a troglodyte pariah because we had failed to act on climate change. That was the path we were heading towards. Ultimately, Australia's negotiations with the European Union will only be concluded when we have a good deal that is in our national interest, not just an open slather but a good deal in our national interest that respects intellectual property and also our labour markets. This would also include delivering commercially significant new market access for our agriculture products. It would be good for our farmers and good for the bush.</para>
<para>You can be assured that we won't be actively sabotaging relations with countries in the EU, as the previous Morrison government did. The Labor Party knows that we are a trading nation, and we will do all that we can to protect and open up new markets.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:10</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr GILLESPIE</name>
    <name.id>72184</name.id>
    <electorate>Lyne</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>A free trade agreement with the European Union is sought by all members of this parliament, not just by the government. As members all know well, negotiations were very advanced during the 46th Parliament. There were some sticking points on geographic indicators for things like feta cheese and other European goods, and it was complicated at one stage because the United Kingdom was still in the EU. We concluded 11 free trade agreements in the space of three parliament returns. When we came to the government benches in 2013, 27 per cent of our trade was covered by free trade agreements. It's now just short of 80 per cent. That's not bad for three terms and 11 trade agreements signed in that time. When we finally conclude the agreement with the EU, the amount of trade coming in and out Australia under free trade agreements will increase to 90 per cent. We are a trading nation. We always produce far more goods than we, a nation of 25 million, need. Whether it's agriculture or minerals and resources, we 25 million feed the energy demands of Japan, Korea, India and other countries in Asia. Our gas goes around the world. Our iron feeds the growth and increasing wealth and sophistication of many countries. In fact, we have powered places like Japan since 1864. Australia does an amazing amount of trade.</para>
<para>The agreement with the EU is a historic legacy agreement that was complicated by several things. We had a huge market for sheepmeat and beef, but Europe at the time also had that amount of beef and sheep production. Things have changed. Europe has grown exponentially, and we are keen to do deals with it. I understand that the geographic indicators are being sorted out as we speak. We are that close to concluding it. Compared to our neighbours—New Zealand, India, America and Argentina—everyone seems to have got a better deal than us. So we are putting the pressure on our colleagues on the other side of the chamber to make sure they match the efficacy and the number of free trade deals that we signed up to.</para>
<para>At the moment, we still have a 32.3 per cent tariff on any Australian dairy that goes over there. Sugar has a 27 per cent tariff. Meat faces a 19 per cent average tariff. The volume that we get in there is minuscule compared to the 127,000 tonnes that New Zealand gets—my goodness! So the pressure is on, colleagues. You've got to get it done, and we will all benefit from it.</para>
<para>Just the other day many members of the parliament visited the Czech and Austrian ambassadors' residences to celebrate their joint national days. It's their turn to lead the EU at the moment. The discussions we had with the ambassadors were very encouraging. They're saying things like, 'We're nearly there,' which in diplomatic terms is really quite significant.</para>
<para>The coalition has an enviable record on trade negotiation. This will be a test of how good this new government is. It's no good bagging us. We had some hiccups with our French partners in the Indo-Pacific, but we've resolved that and we want to do business with them. They have all these processed goods coming into the country as well as chemicals, banking, insurance, cars, aircraft and exotic foods, and we have got plenty of dairy, quality beef, sheepmeat and all sorts of goods that we can now do deals with them on with much better terms than we have. I commend this motion.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! A quorum has been called in the House of Representatives. We'll suspend proceedings until members return.</para>
<para>Sitting suspended from 17 : 15 to 17 : 19</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:20</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms LAWRENCE</name>
    <name.id>299150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hasluck</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I acknowledge the member for Page's interest in this matter and I acknowledge the work done by the previous government and the extraordinarily dedicated team at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in negotiating towards a free trade agreement with the European Union. The EU is already one of our major trading partners, of course, but this agreement will lead to yet stronger ties between our countries. Especially when we consider that over half of Australians have some sort of European heritage, an FTA with the EU is a natural fit with many familial and other linkages to support it.</para>
<para>Formal negotiations for this agreement commenced in mid-2018. The most recent round, round 13, was in Brussels between 17 and 21 October, just a few weeks ago. The next round, which may even be the final round, will take place here in Canberra in February. I'm a member of the Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth and I follow these matters closely. Since taking office, the Albanese government has taken action to bring the free trade agreements with the UK and India into operation. Those bills are before the parliament, and I look forward to them being passed soon. I expect this agreement with the EU will follow soon after, and I'm hopeful that other trade agreements, such as the one with the UAE, will also come about within this term of government.</para>
<para>Recently the head of the European Parliament's trade committee, Mr Bernd Lange, visited Australia. He was upbeat about the renewed progress of the trade negotiations and was quoted as saying that the Albanese government's enshrining of the emissions reduction target in legislation had removed a major barrier to the finalisation of the agreement.</para>
<para>The member for Page was, of course, elected back in 2013. It is a little ironic that, if he and the former government had done the work to legislate for an emissions reduction target, they may have been able to close this deal on their watch. Nevertheless, the climate bill has passed; the obstacle was removed—you're welcome.</para>
<para>The other reason, perhaps, for negotiations slowing down was the damage done to our relationship with France by the former Prime Minister, the member for Cook. The new Prime Minister, though, has been busy repairing that relationship. It is quite clear that the efforts by the Prime Minister; the foreign minister; the Minister for Trade and Tourism, Senator Farrell; and others have gone a long way towards repairing relationships and instilling trust in our international and trade relationships since the election, just as Ministers Conroy and Bowen will be doing at the COP in Egypt.</para>
<para>To return to the positives: the EU is a market of 450 million people of relatively high average incomes. We look forward to finalising the agreement with the EU, and, as I say, this could occur as early as February. It is right that the member for Page should wish this to occur. Mr Lange of the European Parliament says he expects to see significant progress in February. What the government will not do, however, is rush it. We will get the best outcome for Australia.</para>
<para>Minister Farrell is a fair man, and he will negotiate fairly, putting our nation's interests at the heart of this agreement. European countries have renewed interest in the diversification of trade as the war between Russia and Ukraine has brought home the importance of reducing dependence on Russia, especially for energy. There are many ways in which this new energy economy can be a focus of cooperation between Australia and the EU. The European Commission's report on the most recent round of negotiations in October this year described a good, constructive atmosphere and comprehensive agreement, echoing the words of the member for Page in this motion.</para>
<para>I note that New Zealand have beaten us to the chase: they agreed an FTA with the EU in the middle of the year. Our own agricultural exporters are eager to see increased access to the EU for their quality products. The FTAs that the Albanese government will enact with the UK and with India; the imminent agreement with the EU; the further prospective agreements with other countries, such as the UAE and the Gulf States; and the Pacific Alliance with the South American countries will lead to greater trade and prosperity. It is good timing, as we otherwise face a period of flat growth in the economy.</para>
<para>Crucially, these agreements will help to reduce our dependence on a single large trading partner, which is important in these times, especially when there is a disagreement or a breakdown in those trade relationships. Relationships are important. The government has spent a great deal of time and energy since the May election on repairing and strengthening our relationships with our near neighbours and with countries around the world. This work is now starting to pay off. The finalisation of trade agreements is a sign of that progress and of the re-establishment of the trust that will enable business and trade to flourish.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:25</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr LAXALE</name>
    <name.id>299174</name.id>
    <electorate>Bennelong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It gives me great pleasure to rise here today—both as the member for Bennelong and as a member of the Joint Standing Committee on Trade and Investment Growth—to talk about this significant free trade agreement, which is incredibly important for our nation. I'll also confess that I stand here as a former citizen of the European Union and a former French citizen. To be part of a parliament that is prioritising the finalisation of this trade agreement is something I never thought would happen but is something to be really excited about. To finalise this agreement, to open up free trade between Australia and the EU, is incredibly important.</para>
<para>We've heard here today that the current trade agreement between both our continents is outdated and needs to be updated. Thank goodness we've had a change of government so that we can continue on with the progress. You'd have noticed those opposite earlier—they're not here now, and I'm not pointing to you, honourable members—were talking about their record on free trade agreements. But they didn't mention the two huge elephants in the room with regard to the EU trade agreement, which were their terrible and failed climate policy and the disrespect of the previous Prime Minister towards one of our biggest trading partners, and one of the biggest trading partners in Europe: France.</para>
<para>Do you wonder why New Zealand signed their free trade agreement before ours? Because they had a better climate policy than we did. Our free trade agreement with the European Union stalled because of 10 years of division and delay on climate chaos. I will read you a quote from the former European Union ambassador, Dr Pulch:</para>
<quote><para class="block">In Europe, every agreement, whether it's political or economic or trade, needs to be a net plus on climate change.</para></quote>
<para>That would have been a bit of a challenge with the climate change policy that was in place beforehand. Now we have a new government with a more ambitious climate policy, and that helps us enormously. I'll stress that point: without the change of government, this free trade agreement would have stalled—it did stall—and would not have progressed. Now we have a new government that has set climate targets, and the doors are now open to Europe once again. They have gained significant momentum.</para>
<para>We saw, very early on, our new Prime Minister visit the French President to start to repair and reset the relationship—and what a breath of fresh air that was. We can now partner with our European parliaments and colleagues, particularly to help our neighbours here in the Pacific on climate change. The technology that the Europeans have in dealing with climate change and emissions is something that we should be a part of and share with our European colleagues.</para>
<para>We have an unwavering commitment to this free trade agreement, which is something I talk about often with my colleague the member for Hasluck, in our role on the committee. It's something that, as a former European myself, I am very, very interested in, because we know that the EU is one of Australia's largest trading partners and enhanced links with Europe will help us here in our own region in the Pacific, but also in terms of energy security. It will also facilitate huge investment in renewable energy here in Australia, but also in sustainable, critical mineral supply across the world. Here in Australia we dig up every mineral you need to make solar panels and batteries. And we've heard from some members here today about the significant improvements we need to make in agriculture to be able to unlock the European market.</para>
<para>It gives me great pleasure that the government has changed so that we can continue on and move this free trade agreement along. I'm hopeful that it can conclude very soon, but I can tell you: if it weren't for that change of government, this free trade agreement would have got nowhere.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:29</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BIRRELL</name>
    <name.id>288713</name.id>
    <electorate>Nicholls</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Free trade agreements are important. The European FTA is a test for Labor. I think the coalition has got a very proud history on free trade agreements, finalising 11 free trade agreements since 2013. That really lifted the share of Australia's trade covered by FTAs, from 27 per cent in 2013 to almost 80 per cent. In my electorate of Nicholls, primary producers, growers and food processors all benefit from the coalition's track record of delivering fair and balanced free trade agreements with other nations. We've got a gross regional product of $6.6 billion, of which $1.5 billion is down to agriculture. This really benefits from those free trade agreements. As I said, the coalition has got a proud record of finalising these things. The EU free trade agreement is well on its way.</para>
<para>But we have to make sure that we negotiate a comprehensive deal to drive Australian exports, economic growth and job creation. A high-quality FTA with the EU should deliver expanded trade in goods and significantly better market access. It needs to do that.</para>
<para>The European Union has a history of expanding protectionism through free trade agreements, particularly using what are called geographical indicators. Many people would be familiar with champagne, which can only be labelled as such if it comes from the Champagne region of France. As a result, we now enjoy Australian-made sparkling wine.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPU</name>
    <name.id>230531</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Workplace Relations</title>
          <page.no>138</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:31</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PAYNE</name>
    <name.id>144732</name.id>
    <electorate>Canberra</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) notes that:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) the gender pay gap still sits at an unacceptable 14.1 per cent;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) men earn an extra $263.90 per week more than women;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) the gender pay gap has only narrowed by 5.1 per cent since 1983; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(d) work in female-dominated industries is disproportionately undervalued because of discriminatory assumptions about the value of the work; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) commends the Government for amending the <inline font-style="italic">Fair Work Act 2009</inline> and related legislation to improve job security and gender equity by:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(a) including in the Fair Work Act 2009: gender equity, secure work, an equal remuneration principle, and enhancing the enforcement and compliance framework;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(b) prohibiting pay secrecy clauses; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(c) establishing new expert panels in the Fair Work Commission for pay equity and the care and community sector.</para></quote>
<para>I'm pleased to move this motion today that notes the unacceptable gender pay gap that exists today and persists in Australia and commends the government on the work that they are doing to reform our industrial relations system to improve that.</para>
<para>We have known about the gender pay gap in Australia for quite some time, but, unfortunately, real movement on it has been agonisingly slow. Today the gender pay gap in Australia sits at an unacceptable 14.1 per cent. The average Australian man now earns $263.90 more per week than the average Australian woman. The Global Gender Gap Index ranks us 43 out of 156 countries, which is really very depressing for a country like Australia. We must be doing much better than that, and I'm proud that our new Albanese Labor government is getting that work underway.</para>
<para>In the previous financial year under the previous government, the gap actually increased by 0.3 per cent. That means that, on power bills, the average woman will pay two per cent of her salary, compared to 1.7 per cent for men. For rent, the average woman will pay 32 per cent of her salary, compared to 27.5 per cent for men. For groceries, the average woman will pay 9.4 per cent of her salary, compared to 8.1 per cent for men.</para>
<para>The gap persists in all industries but especially in highly feminised industries, which comes down largely to outdated and discriminatory assumptions about the value of work that women do, particularly women in our care economy. There should never have been any doubt about the importance of these industries and how important that work is for our society, for our community and for our economy, but it was really confirmed to us through the pandemic just how important these industries really are. I want to specifically reference those who care for our oldest Australians, our youngest Australians and Australians living with disability, as they are predominantly women. This is skilled work; it is physically, emotionally and mentally taxing work, and it should be better recognised. The importance of the work they do is clear, and it is unacceptable that their pay persists at such low levels today. I'm proud that this week we've seen the Fair Work Commission respond to submissions made by the government and the union movement to deliver a 15 per cent increase to the wages of aged-care workers, which is well deserved and well overdue. But the work is not done.</para>
<para>When you compare these industries with male dominated industries where workers are skilled at a similar level, the differences are stark and unacceptable. It's not good enough. Women should not be paid less than men in the year 2022, and we should close this gap. That's why on 29 August we recognised Equal Pay Day, which marked the extra 60 days that Australian women must work to earn the same annual salary as Australian men, and that's why our government is taking strong action through the introduction of the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill 2022, which introduces a number of measures to close the gap.</para>
<para>Some of the big changes being made in this are the inclusion of gender equity, secure work and equal renumeration as goals of the Fair Work Act. The bill also enhances the compliance framework and strengthens the ability of the commission to order pay increases for workers in low-paid, female dominated industries through the establishment of two new expert panels. In this bill the government is also prohibiting pay secrecy clauses in employment contracts. Alison Pennington from the Australia Institute's Centre for Future Work has said that pay secrecy is:</para>
<quote><para class="block">… popular with employers in Australia because it prevents the free sharing of information that employees need to know, to know where they stand in relation to each other and to effectively bargain to get a higher pay increase.</para></quote>
<para>As described by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency:</para>
<quote><para class="block">Pay secrecy means that employees do not have full information about their colleagues' pay; such as formal base salary levels, salary structures, and informal remuneration salary components.</para></quote>
<para>In effect, it allows employers to effectively discriminate against women in the workplace behind their backs. It's wrong and it must end.</para>
<para>In Australia women face barriers to working the hours they want, including access to affordable child care, access to flexible work, equal sharing of care and representation in leadership. In 2022, only 14 women are chief executives in the top 200 companies in Australia. I am proud that our government is up for the task of addressing these gaps in our society and economy and that the work has already begun under our new Albanese Labor government.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Scrymgour</name>
    <name.id>F2S</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Yes, I second the motion, and I reserve my right to speak at a later time.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr SCAMPS</name>
    <name.id>299623</name.id>
    <electorate>Mackellar</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of this motion regarding rectifying the gender pay gap. Gender equality is something that most people in this country agree with in theory; however, in practice, it does not yet exist in Australia. Gender inequality is particularly evident in our workforce, which does not yet reflect the values of the Australia we want. This year, 2022, the gender pay gap is still over 14 per cent, meaning women need to work 60 days more each year to be on par with men. This pay gap, together with the reduced workplace participation of women, contributes to the superannuation gap, which sits at around 40 per cent less for women.</para>
<para>Women are also vastly underrepresented at board level, with only six per cent of ASX 300 companies having female CEOs. Outside of work hours, women also take on disproportionately more unpaid care work than men, often including the cognitive and emotional labour of managing the household and family. However, according to Deloitte Access Economics' latest report <inline font-style="italic">Breaking </inline><inline font-style="italic">the norm</inline>, which was released only last week, a shocking one-third of Australian men still believe that gender inequality doesn't actually exist in this country. These statistics paint a clear picture of gender inequality—a picture that is reflected in the World Economic Forum's <inline font-style="italic">Global </inline><inline font-style="italic">gender gap </inline><inline font-style="italic">report 2022</inline>, where Australia is ranked a low 43rd. Our neighbour New Zealand is ranked number 4. At current rates of progress, it will take approximately 132 years to reach total gender parity.</para>
<para>This House must play a critical role in enacting legislation that will accelerate gender pay equality in workplaces across this country, including in this parliament. To do this effectively we need affirmative action. Some steps towards affirmative action are already underway, and I welcome the recent progress made. In particular, I welcome the amendments to the Fair Work Act that are the focus of this motion. These include prohibiting pay secrecy clauses and establishing a panel in the Fair Work Commission for pay equity in the care sector.</para>
<para>I would also like to recognise the recent budget measures that support greater female participation in the workplace through legislation for cheaper child care and the supporting of men to take paid parental leave. I also want to recognise the Respect@Work legislation currently before parliament, which places a positive duty on employers to prevent workplace sexual harassment, and, additionally, the recent historic introduction in New South Wales of positive consent legislation and the decriminalising of abortion.</para>
<para>However, I would also like to highlight that even in our own parliamentary workplace we need to do a lot more. In the recent review of the MoP(S) Act regarding workplace conditions here in parliament, it was found that there was a significant impact on people with caring responsibilities. A number of current and former MoP(S) Act employees, especially women, said that their workload and work environment were wholly incompatible with any caring responsibilities they had or planned to have. I would like to say that, after just six months on the job, I wholeheartedly agree with that statement. My staff are struggling as they work many extra days and hours of overtime each week. Our electorate office also relies heavily on volunteers, the vast majority of whom are women. They are performing core duties yet they are unpaid. The work culture here in parliament and in the electoral offices is not currently compatible with gender equality and must be addressed if this country is serious about encouraging equal participation of women in this parliament.</para>
<para>Parliament should set the standard for businesses and organisations around Australia. When parliament falls short of setting the standard for gender equality for the rest of the country, is it any wonder other workplaces also do not do enough? Discrimination against women and the devaluing of their work is pervasive and is even entrenched in our own parliamentary workplace. We must do more. I commend this motion to the House.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:42</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms BYRNES</name>
    <name.id>299145</name.id>
    <electorate>Cunningham</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I rise to speak in support of the motion of the member for Canberra and I thank her for moving it. Women in Australia currently face a gender pay gap of 14.1 per cent, and working women are still retiring with less superannuation than men. I have always fought for working people and I care deeply about helping working women, particularly working women in their care sector, who are undervalued and underpaid. These are workers who care for and educate our children, and who provide care support and social interaction for our elderly and people with a disability. They are passionate, hardworking and professional, and they deserve better. This motion commends the government for taking action to address these injustices we should all be concerned about. It is certainly something I have fought for during my time in the building and I'm really proud to be part of the solution.</para>
<para>To help close the gender pay gap, the government is amending the Fair Work Act to make gender equity a main objective. This will ensure that gender equity is at the heart of decisions made by the Fair Work Commission when determining pay increases. We are establishing two new Fair Work Commission panels: a pay equity expert panel and a care and community sector expert panel. These panels will give the commission the expertise needed to better understand both gender pay equity issues and the issues affecting the care and community sector.</para>
<para>The creation of a statutory equal remuneration principle will also make it easier for the Fair Work Commission to order pay increases for workers in female-dominated industries. This principle will remove the need for a male comparator when progressing equal pay claims. This requirement currently presents a significant obstacle for these claims. It will also ensure that, when assessing work value, gender based assumptions are not considered. These changes will help improve pay and conditions in the care sector and other female-dominated industries. These improvements are already happening under our government, with the Fair Work Commission on Friday confirming an increase to minimum wage of at least 15 per cent for aged-care workers in direct care roles on a number of different awards. Our actions will help encourage more workers into these sectors that are facing a workforce crisis. We need more aged-care workers, we need more early childhood educators and we need more disability support workers.</para>
<para>Thirty-seven per cent of early childhood educators told the United Workers Union that they did not intend to stay in the sector long-term; around 16 per cent of nursing and aged-care workers told the Australian Nursing & Midwifery Federation that they were planning to leave their profession; and 50 per cent of regional workers in disability care said that they would not be in the sector in five years. In order to attract and retain professional and caring support workers we need to pay them fairly. This is why we are empowering and enhancing the Fair Work Act and the commission to better deliver for these workers.</para>
<para>Many working women are not employed in female dominated industries. These women face different barriers to pay equity. Pay secrecy clauses prevent colleagues from discussing their salaries with each other. This reduces transparency and disadvantages workers who are seeking to negotiate individual pay rises. Our government's change to ban pay secrecy clauses is a win for workers, particularly working women. Now colleagues will be able to discuss their salaries with each other, improving their ability to ask for a pay rise. Women will be able to question why their male colleague who does the same work as them is earning more. It's a great change for workers and will help to drive up wages.</para>
<para>Finally, after a decade we have a government that is looking out for working people and addressing the injustices faced by working women. This motion rightfully recognises the plight faced by working women. It also rightfully recognises the benefits of the government's actions to benefit working women. For too long the previous government held back wages. For too long the previous government neglected working Australians, particularly those that got us through the pandemic—the cleaners, the nurses, the aged-care workers and all of our other frontline heroes, so many of whom are women.</para>
<para>I speak in favour of this motion because I know how important these changes are to women in my community. Just last week my colleague and friend Stephen Jones, the member for Whitlam, and I visited Big Fat Smile in Dapto. I met Kaitlin and her daughter Amelia. Kaitlin works in disability care and is looking forward to cheaper child care under the Albanese Labor government. Kaitlin has many more things to look forward to under our government, and the changes that this motion commends are some of them. Finally workers like Kaitlin will have a voice that can speak to their experiences in the Fair Work Commission and they will have a Fair Work Act that has gender equity as an objective.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:47</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Canberra for moving this motion. Australia has a problem with gender equity when it comes to employment. The federal election made it very clear that women are sick and tired of putting up with being treated like second-class citizens in the workplace. Women's work, both at home and in the workplace, has been undervalued for far too long. Women do the bulk of unpaid work at home and in the community. According to statistics cited by the Workplace Gender Equality Agency, the value of unpaid care work—and that includes cooking and cleaning, as well as caring for children, the disabled or the elderly—amounts to no less than $650 billion, the equivalent of more than 50 per cent of GDP. A decade ago the Grattan Institute found that a six per cent increase in women's participation in the workforce would add another $25 billion to GDP. Today the figure would have to be much greater.</para>
<para>As the mover of this motion noted, it is now 2022 and the gender pay gap still sits at 14.1 per cent.</para>
<para>An honourable member interjectin g—</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>We are sick of it. It has only narrowed by a miserable 5.1 per cent since 1983. I was 11 then. We are facing worker shortages of historic proportions. Women are not able to take up employment opportunities because they're the primary caregivers in their homes and the cost of child care guarantees that much of the income they take home will go towards paying for early childhood education and care while they work. It is a futile and demoralising exercise.</para>
<para>A survey by the University of New South Wales for the SDA found that 36 per cent of the 6,500 lower-paid retail workers they surveyed, who were overwhelmingly women, would be able and would like to work more hours if their rosters were more predictable. As I put at the Jobs and Skills Summit, these women—and thousands like them in other feminised industries—deserve roster justice. If their employers in retail, for example, can plan ahead when it comes to their inventory, it shouldn't be too much of a stretch to do the same when it comes to their people and their rosters.</para>
<para>According to the University of New South Wales work and care survey, some staff who service in the supermarket can barely afford food themselves. 'When I get weeks with only a couple of shifts, it's hard to afford groceries,' says one. 'They would change the roster at 8 pm at night to have me scheduled on the next morning at 8 am and never contact me about the change and then act like I was a no-show,' says another. 'It's all over the place. Shifts get changed last minute, never get the same shifts every fortnight, extra contract hours, and they give you bare minimum but expect you to give up your weekends without notice,' says another.</para>
<para>Meanwhile, this cohort of up to 1.3 million people, all but powerless in the workplace, is also largely ignored in the national childcare debate, which is geared to middle-class professionals working nine to five Monday to Friday. Those seeking care early in the morning, in the evening, on weekends or on public holidays so they can staff a register or restock shelves come up empty. I could go on. There are tens of thousands of women out there facing similar predicaments.</para>
<para>As I'm pleased that women and work got on the agenda of the Jobs and Skills Summit, I'm also pleased that in the Jobs and Skills Australia legislation the government saw fit to incorporate a gender lens. As to the secure jobs, better pay legislation, I believe it would improve the bill, improve its prospects of actually getting more women into the workforce, if it made it clear that what we're seeking is gender equality in the workplace, not merely gender equity, as is currently stated. Equity merely sets the stage for equality, putting women and others who are behind the eight ball at the starting line, rather than requiring an outcome. The convention for the elimination of discrimination against women, the ILO in respect of its gender equality conventions and the Workplace Gender Equality Act all say gender equality means substantive equality between men and women, and that's the outcome we're looking for.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms CLAYDON</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
    <electorate>Newcastle</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I am delighted to rise on this motion moved by my friend and colleague the member for Canberra. Shifting this gender pay gap is serious business, and it should be serious business for this parliament. This week we're seeing the passage of the Anti-Discrimination and Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Respect at Work) Bill, and nothing highlights the need to start addressing some of these inequalities more than the reading of that first Kate Jenkins report and the subsequent reforms that need to be undertaken in workplaces across Australia now.</para>
<para>Whenever people ask me seriously what difference government makes, I remind them of the fact that, when the coalition government was first elected into office back in 2013, Australia sat 24th in the world gender equality rankings. When then Prime Minister Tony Abbott decided to make himself minister for women, a moment we were all somewhat surprised by, he decided we didn't need to do gendered-responsive budgeting in this nation anymore, a mechanism that Australia used to lead the world in. But, no, we didn't need that anymore, and that resulted in Australia plummeting to a record historical low of 50th place in those world gender equality rankings. We went from 24 to 50 within less than a decade. That's what happens when you drop the ball, when you don't want to monitor, when you aren't accountable. This is an absolutely unacceptable position for any government to take.</para>
<para>Women haven't been getting a fair deal for some time. We know this from the rankings, but the last decade has made things much worse. We've got a current gender pay gap of 14.1 per cent, and we know that means on average women are earning $263.90 less than the men working full-time. In other words, women must work 60 more days by the end of the financial year to just play catch up. The gender pay gap persists across all industries, and progress to slow the gender pay gap has been uneven and incrementally slow. That is not good enough. Women should not be paid less than men. It's that simple.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government hasn't wasted a day in trying to improve equality for women. In our short few months in government we've introduced 10 days paid domestic violence leave. We're acting on our commitment to build more affordable housing for women and kids fleeing violence, including $100 million in our budget for emergency housing. We've provided another 500 support workers for women fleeing violence. We've acted to provide cheaper child care and six months of paid parental leave. We've also introduced legislation to act on all of the recommendations from Kate Jenkins's <inline font-style="italic">Respect@Work</inline> report, which will strengthen laws that will prevent sexual harassment at work.</para>
<para>On the issue of closing the gender pay gap in Australia, the Albanese government has taken decisive action. We've introduced the Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Secure Jobs, Better Pay) Bill. That bill, introduced in the last sitting period, will amend the Fair Work Act to provide fairer pay and conditions for working women and address those key drivers of gender pay inequality. This bill puts gender equity at the very heart of our fair work system by making gender equity and job security objects in the Fair Work Act. The bill also adds gender equality to the modern awards and minimum wages objectives and adds to the need to improve access to secure work on the modern awards objectives.</para>
<para>There's a clear expectation now that the Fair Work Commission must consider gender equality when performing its functions, when setting the minimum wage, when considering changes to awards and in all other decisions it makes. I'm very pleased to see those aspects on the up already, with the 15 per cent wage increase for aged-care workers and an increase to the minimum wage. These are good steps in the right direction.</para>
<para>The Workplace Gender Equality Agency Director, Mary Wooldridge, spoke recently about the impact the gender pay gap has on women at a time of blooming inflation. I direct the House to her comments. I can assure you that her observations that 'sheflation' impacts all Australians are absolutely true. Addressing the gender pay gap is a serious issue. It requires leadership, and that's what we're doing.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>17:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms STEGGALL</name>
    <name.id>175696</name.id>
    <electorate>Warringah</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Canberra for bringing forward this important motion on gender pay equity. We know that, disappointingly, recent research from the Workplace Gender Equality Agency shows that the gender pay gap in Australia is impacting women across every industry in every occupation and at every age or life stage. That is really depressing. When I talk to young women in Warringah, they're quite shocked to hear about the status quo, of where things are, when they're at that point of launching into their careers full of optimism. To know that the system is still so stacked against them is incredibly frustrating.</para>
<para>The overall national gender pay gap sits at 14.1 per cent, and, in fact, it's 0.3 percentage points higher than six months ago. Women on average earn $263 less per week than men. This difference, combined with cost-of-living pressures, is placing significant stress on Australian households, particularly for single parents. KPMG estimates that the unequal distribution of household and child-rearing labour is responsible for 39 per cent of this gap, something that a strong paid parental leave scheme can improve. Adding part-time workers widens the gender pay gap for all employees by some 29.7 per cent. Some of the largest gaps are in fact in the professional, scientific and technical services; health care; and financial and insurance services. These are some of the biggest employment services in Warringah.</para>
<para>Most disappointingly, despite all the rhetoric, all of the debates in this House and others, and policy interventions, the gap has only closed by five per cent since 1983. I find that so astounding. The global data shows the same picture. It's consistent. The International Labour Organization has noted that globally, despite substantial progress in women's employment, there had not been any meaningful narrowing of gender pay gaps at work for the past 20 years.</para>
<para>On average, the gender pay gap globally is approximately 20 per cent, and so for every dollar earnt by a man a woman will earn 80c. The gender pay gap contributes to long-term inequity and is one of the key reasons that women over 55 are the fastest-growing group experiencing homelessness. Low superannuation contributions are driven by low wages. Time out of the workforce for childcare and other reasons and for caring responsibilities all stall your superannuation and career progression. We know this; there are no secrets.</para>
<para>We also know that climate change will impact women disproportionately. The gender pay gap makes women more vulnerable to the impacts of climate change—70 per cent of people living in conditions of poverty globally are women, and across the world women have limited access to and control of their environmental goods and services, have negligible participation in decision-making and are often not involved in the distribution of environment management benefits. So women are less able to confront environmental impacts.</para>
<para>I welcome the government's commitment today in relation to improving gender pay equity, including the increased paid parental leave, which took some push, but it was great to see that announcement in the budget; improved affordability of childcare; and increased pay transparency elements of the Fair Work amendments. These are welcome. They aren't coming into effect for some time, though, and I have some concerns about the delay. I appreciate there are implementation issues, but the delay means that women continue to be on the back foot.</para>
<para>There is a strong economic case for these changes. Increasing paid parental leave entitlements to 26 weeks will cost the government some $600 million per year, but it will add $900 million to GDP per year as well as boosting a mother's lifetime earnings by $30,000. Australia has one of the least generous paid parental leave schemes in the world. It's highly gendered and discriminatory in considering only a woman's income in the calculation of eligibility. There are some improvements coming to the system, but I would urge the government to continue. It is not enough; 26 weeks should only be the starting point. We need to continue.</para>
<para>It's clear that childcare affordability is a major issue, and there has been a pledge by the government to improve that, but we need to recognise that the sector is a heavily feminised sector that has critical worker shortage. There were some 7,000 vacancies across the sector in September already and, with the proposed changes, demand will increase. We need to make sure that the government has a holistic view of the picture and increases support for women.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms</name>
    <name.id>282212</name.id>
    <electorate>Jagajaga</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>THWAITES () (): Thank you to my friend the member for Canberra for moving this motion. The two of us share a keen interest and passion for working to close the gender pay gap, a passion that I know is shared by all my colleagues here and, in fact, by everyone in our government from the Prime Minister down. What's particularly exciting about speaking to this motion today is that I'm talking not just about a passion and an interest but about a government that is getting on with work that will close the gender pay gap.</para>
<para>At the moment, the gender pay gap sits at an unacceptable 14.1 per cent. It is so disappointing to see that figure. It translates to men earning almost $264 per week more than women. There are many women in our community—men as well—who are shocked when they hear that number. People tend to think that this is a problem we've already fixed. In fact, it's a problem that is taking far too long to address. I'm so pleased that, across a range of measures, our government is getting on with trying to close the gender pay gap seriously and as quickly as we can.</para>
<para>The gender pay gap persists across all industries, though we know that it's most felt in the sectors that are heavily dominated by women workers, such as aged care and early childhood education. It's in these spaces that government really can play a major difference, and it is these spaces that our government is focusing on to make a big difference. Our first budget last month demonstrated that, under our government, women up front and centre. We are committed to making Australia a world leader on gender equality. Our government is following through on our commitment to cheaper childcare, and I know what a difference that is going to make to women in my electorate and around the country, who will be able to afford more childcare and, therefore, be able to work more. It will make it easier for parents to get back into work, particularly mums who may want to work that extra day a week.</para>
<para>Another critical measure in our budget is our expansion of paid parental leave. I'm so proud of this achievement. It's something I've advocated for for a long time in this place. I've spoken about it a lot and I am so proud to be part of a government that is delivering it. We know there is a wealth of research out there that shows that a well-designed paid parental leave policy will deliver dividends in encouraging parents to share unpaid caring responsibilities. It has positive impacts on children's development and the wellbeing of parents and, in the context of what we're talking about now, is most likely to build women's workforce participation. So that means, again, that women have the chance to work more and it will, hopefully, have some impact on closing that gender pay gap. The gap in earnings that women face across their lifetime means too often, at the moment, that, when women get to the end of their working life, they are actually facing time in poverty. As we know, older women are the fastest-growing group facing homelessness. It should not be like this in our community.</para>
<para>Importantly, now, our government is amending the Fair Work Act to add gender equity to the heart of our Fair Work system. In doing so, we are setting a clear expectation that the Fair Work Commission must consider this aim when performing its functions. Whether it's setting the minimum wage, considering changes to awards or something else, this is a development that will make a real difference.</para>
<para>I mentioned aged-care and early-education workers before because both of these sectors are so important to our country. They helped carry us through the pandemic. I've said it before and I will say it again: the women who work in these sectors—and the men—are absolute legends. We rely on the people—mainly, women—who work in these sectors, and in fact we will do so more and more in the future. We know, again, that demand for aged care in our country is growing. We know that our reforms to child care will mean that demand for child care will grow. Yet these entire sectors are at risk, because we do often struggle to have a workforce. And one of the main reasons we struggle to have a workforce is that their work is still undervalued. What we might call the caring economy, or really what we see as 'women's work', has been underpaid for decades, and, despite the best previous efforts of unions and advocates, we have not secured these women the pay rises they should have. So I am proud to be part of a government that is now taking the action we need to close the gender pay gap, to take this issue seriously and to look out for the women of Australia.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:06</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr STEVENS</name>
    <name.id>176304</name.id>
    <electorate>Sturt</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I indeed rise to support the motion and commend the member for Canberra for bringing it to this place. I share in all the other comments that were made at the opening by other contributors to this debate—that of course it's completely unacceptable that we have a gender pay gap in our economy, and I'm sure it's a unanimous view of the parliament that we should be doing all we can to address that and getting that 14.1 per cent to at least zero. I've certainly worked with a lot of women who should've been paid a lot more than the men that they worked alongside in their workplace. So getting it to at least zero is something that we should all be working towards as a parliament together.</para>
<para>I was, equally, very happy to see the 15 per cent interim decision of the Fair Work Commission on Friday, and I note that that is, at this stage, a decision related to the direct care workforce in aged care. I join with the comments from others around the need for that to extend to all those who work in aged care, including those who do a whole range of other very important tasks that are not direct care in both residential and community settings. I hope that that decision is one of the best examples of a significant increase, in a workforce that is very predominantly female. When we're dealing with a figure of 14.1 per cent, a figure of 15 per cent higher than that in a sector is heading in the right direction.</para>
<para>It is in an environment, concerningly, of very high inflation. On the face of it, 15 per cent sounds like a lot of money, until you acknowledge that inflation at the moment is at 7.3 per cent, and the Reserve Bank, and the government in their own budget, are anticipating inflation being even higher. So, of course, 15 per cent in real terms is more like seven per cent. That is still a significant increase in real terms, but, obviously, if the purpose of the decision was to increase real wages by 15 per cent then they won't be achieving that if inflation keeps running as high as it is.</para>
<para>Obviously, we need to be always looking for opportunities to listen to women who are in a situation in their career where, for a variety of reasons, they're not earning the same amount of money as men; we need to understand from women what some of the challenges and barriers are that have been put in their way; and we need to figure out more ways in which we can do better.</para>
<para>I don't think that's always going to be at the government level. In many ways, significant cultural change is needed by employers in workplaces around the country. Certainly in my own experience as an employer before being in this place one of the things that I always sought to address, and always heard from the women that I worked with, was the need for a lot more flexibility, particularly if they were to have children and leave the workforce. They didn't want to be in a position where there was too much stringency around their ability to return to their career. Instead of leaving a full-time role and having to come back full time, they wanted ways in which there could be more flexibility.</para>
<para>The COVID period has made people a lot more open-minded about alternative work practices which would provide opportunities for women who do need to leave the workforce for a period of time to have a lot more flexibility about the way in which they can return, and not to have so many black-and-white situations around some of those challenges.</para>
<para>It's good that we're talking about this and it's good that we're making progress. It's not acceptable that the gap is what it is, and I hope we take every opportunity in this place to find new ways of improving the situation further and getting to a point where we have, at minimum, parity of wages between men and women in this nation. It's absolutely fundamental.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:11</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms COKER</name>
    <name.id>263547</name.id>
    <electorate>Corangamite</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I'd like to begin by thanking my colleague, the member for Canberra, for moving this motion. Australian women are front and centre in the Albanese government's first budget—a budget that is delivering on our election commitment to make Australia a world leader in gender equality. I'm so proud that, after a decade of neglect, our government is unlocking and valuing the talent, potential and contribution of women in Australia. We know that policies which are good for women are also good for our economy, good for productivity and good for families.</para>
<para>The woman's budget statement sets out our government's commitments to delivering long-term change to advance gender equality, focusing on women's economic equality, ending violence against women, and gender equality in health and wellbeing. These themes are interconnected and they matter. Financial insecurity can impact a woman's ability to leave a violent relationship. Violence can have devastating health impacts and diminish a woman's capacity to participate in the workforce and progress her career. Time out of the workforce and the gender pay gap can have a long-term impact on women's lifetime earnings, especially impacting retirement incomes for older women including—and importantly—superannuation. That's why the Albanese government is leading the national push to close the gender pay gap.</para>
<para>The national gender pay gap in Australia is currently 14.1 per cent, which means that, on average, a woman working full-time earns $263.90 less per week than a man working full time. Over the past two decades the gender pay gap has persisted, decreasing by only 1.2 percentage points since May 2002, and by only 5.1 per cent since 1983. When we analyse the gap, based on both full-time and part-time workers, and include overtime payments, the gap is much larger, at a staggering 29.7 per cent.</para>
<para>This is unacceptable and it is why the Albanese government is providing $20.2 million in investment to the Fair Work Commission to establish two new expert panels—one on pay equity and the other on the care and community sector. This will strengthen the commission's capacity to determine applications from female dominated industries, where work is often undervalued and underpaid. Already, under the Albanese government, we have seen a 15 per cent increase in the wages of aged-care workers. We are also reforming the workplace relations system to make gender equity an objective of the Fair Work Act and legislate an equal remuneration principle.</para>
<para>We have also taken the first step to remove barriers that limit women's opportunities when they have caring responsibilities. That includes delivering a $531 million investment to expand the Paid Parental Leave scheme up to 26 weeks by July 2026. It is the biggest boost to Australia's Paid Parental Leave scheme since it was created by the former Labor government in 2011. It is something I am very proud of and have fought for. It will support parents to spend more time with their children and share caring responsibilities more equally.</para>
<para>The budget also invests $4.7 million across four years to make it easier and cheaper for parents to access early childhood education and care. To support the national plan to end violence against women and children and its ambition of an Australia free of gender based violence, the Commonwealth is making a record investment of over $1.7 billion. Of that, $1.3 billion will fund a range of targeted initiatives to address gender based violence and will fund 500 frontline service and community workers to support women and children experiencing family, domestic and sexual violence.</para>
<para>Crucially, $42 million will help implement all recommendations of the Respect@Work report. This includes $32 million to fund women's centres in all states and territories to provide free advice to assist women when they need it. There will also be money to support implementation of 10 days family violence leave. I am so proud of that. This is vital to the economy, to families and to the wellbeing and health of women, and I'm very proud to stand here in support of this motion.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>201906</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>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</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Critical Minerals Strategy</title>
          <page.no>145</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PITT</name>
    <name.id>148150</name.id>
    <electorate>Hinkler</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1)notes that the previous Government:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a)had the foresight to implement Australia's first ever Critical Minerals Strategy in 2019;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b)provided billions in funding to support the development of Australia's critical minerals sector since 2019;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c)provided a $1.25 billion loan in April 2022 through the Critical Minerals Facility to Australian company Iluka Resources to develop Australia's first integrated rare earths refinery in Western Australia;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (d)committed $200 million in the 2022-23 budget to develop early and mid-stage critical minerals projects as part of the Critical Minerals Accelerator Initiative funded under the Regional Accelerator Initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (e)committed $50.5 million in the 2022-23 budget to the Critical Minerals Research and Development Centre;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2)further notes that the Government is cutting critical minerals funding:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a)by $100 million under the Critical Minerals Development Program, formerly known as the Critical Minerals Accelerator Initiative; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b)to the $50.5 million Critical Minerals Research and Development Centre, now rebranded as a 'hub', by pushing funding out over four years instead of three years; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3)calls on the Government to:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (a)explain why it believes renaming an existing program and cutting its funding makes it a 'new initiative' as described by the Prime Minister;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (b)explain why it is undermining its own rush towards an 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2030 by cutting investment in Australia's critical minerals, which are vital to the creation of technologies like solar panels, wind turbines and batteries; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">   (c)reverse their cuts to the Critical Minerals Accelerator Initiative and the Critical Minerals Research and Development Centre.</para></quote>
<para>It was the coalition government that had the foresight to establish Australia's first critical minerals strategy in 2019. That was a strategy that has been updated and which has been incredibly important to the development of critical minerals industry in Australia. As I know you know, Madam Deputy Speaker Sharkie, nothing is more important than local politics.</para>
<para>For the people of my electorate, how important are critical minerals to their everyday lives? They are used in ventilators, medical equipment, defence equipment, fighter aircraft, submarines, ships. But they are also used in one of Australia's oldest foundries, the Bundaberg foundry in Bundaberg, which has been established for more than 100 years. We put a request out to the local general manager, Enio Troiani, better known as 'ET'—for obvious reasons—to see exactly what it might be that they use in the Bundaberg foundry for which the critical minerals strategy would apply. If you look at the list of critical minerals—antimony, beryllium , bismuth, chromium, cobalt, gallium, germanium, graphite, hafnium, helium, indium, lithium, magnesium, manganese, neodymium, platinum groups, rare earth elements, rhenium, scandium, tantalum, titanium—all of the ums, I have to say—they are all being utilised in a foundry which has been around for more than a century, which has trained literally thousands of local people, in particular, apprentices. I have been into the foundry any number of times. It is an incredibly important piece of industrial infrastructure for this country. With a 64 cent exchange rate, they are hanging on but, with massive increases in energy costs coming, whether that is for gas or electricity, their viability will once again be on the line.</para>
<para>In critical minerals, what was it that we did as a coalition government? We made significant funding commitments. But what do we see from Labor in their budget? They cut those commitments. This is an area where there is an opportunity for Australia for growth, an incredible opportunity. It could potentially be a sector worth more than $40 billion for this country. That's why we made significant commitments when we were in government. But what we have seen is Labor go and grab it, rebrand it, call it something else but also drop $50 million from the $100 million initiative; they have halved the initiative. This makes a real difference.</para>
<para>For those who are not well informed about the critical minerals area, what we need to keep in mind is that there is one significant player and that is China. More than 80 per cent of all manufacturing occurs in China. They are the buyer. If you are looking to find other opportunities for your product around the world, guess what? When there is a buyer monopoly, guess who stops buying your product?</para>
<para>This is an incredibly challenging and difficult area in which to operate. That is why the coalition government committed some $2 billion in terms of facilities. That's why we made announcements like the $200 million to the Critical Minerals Accelerator Initiative; the $2 billion Regional Accelerator Program, which would contribute another $200 million to that; and $50 million towards establishing the virtual National Critical Minerals Research and Development Centre. The collaboration stream of the Modern Manufacturing Initiative invested almost $250 million in four critical-minerals projects. These are projects and opportunities for which you need to build prototypes, you need proof of concept and you need to ensure that the IP that you have will work.</para>
<para>Currently, as I said, there is a monopoly player in China, who currently controls most of the market. This is not in anyone's interest in terms of economies. It's in no-one's interest in terms of our national security. Look at where these critical elements and rare-earth minerals go. They go into things which are for the defence of our nation and into things which are for medical outcomes. It is really important that we continue to maintain in Australia opportunities for critical-minerals producers, not only to mine them.</para>
<para>We've got to keep in mind it's a mine. It's not different to a coalmine. It's not different to anything; it's still a mine. It still uses trucks, it still uses diesel, it still uses workers, it still uses electricity and it still uses sources of energy, just like every other mine. You may have come across school teachers, for example, who are teaching our kids that there's good mining and bad mining. There's no good mining and bad mining; there's just mining. And we should be out there supporting the sector 100 per cent.</para>
<para>We've seen the new government cutting support for critical minerals at a time when a burgeoning industry is trying to establish itself in a monopoly market. So it is very important that we maintain this strategy. It is incredibly important that we continue to build downstream opportunities. I know this is a big deal for the member for O'Connor because it means jobs in his electorate—there are significant announcements in those areas—on which the local people rely. The idea of those opposite to continue to cut funding to this sector, which is trying to grow, is the wrong decision. It's not in our national interest, and they should rethink it.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr Rick Wilson</name>
    <name.id>198084</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:22</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms SWANSON</name>
    <name.id>264170</name.id>
    <electorate>Paterson</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I really look forward to speaking on critical minerals because, as the former Minister for Resources and Water mentioned earlier, there are some key differences when it comes to critical minerals between the government that we have in place now and the former government. I think one of the big mistakes that the former government made was getting confused about the meaning of a couple of words: 'critical', 'minerals' and 'ministry'. Unfortunately, the former government didn't see fit to put the resources ministry on the front bench. The Albanese government has remedied that terrible error by putting on the front bench an exemplar Minister for Resources, Madeleine King. She, as part of that front bench, has said we need a review of our critical-minerals strategy.</para>
<para>This is where the former government are also a little confused. They want to confuse the words 'appropriate' and 'announcement'. Whilst they certainly made a lot of terrific announcements about critical minerals and their strategy for critical minerals, what they failed to do was appropriate enough money for it. There's a big difference between saying, 'We're going to spend $1.5 million on a strategy,' and appropriating it, which is putting the money in the budget. Every Australian knows that you can talk about buying a new car, buying a fabulous house or trying to buy something for your kids for Christmas, but if you haven't got the money or you can't get access to it then you end up usually not being able to buy it, and you're certainly spending outside your limits. That's what the former government did.</para>
<para>Our government has a new strategy for critical minerals. It's so important because Australia is the fifth-largest globally in supply of critical minerals. We are not only going to have a reliable, properly budgeted critical minerals strategy but we're going to consult with the industry, not cherry-pick like the former government did. We're going to consult with industry. We're going to consult with communities and with traditional owners. We need to get it right.</para>
<para>I heard the former minister mention antimony, a rare and critical mineral. We're looking at how that can contribute to the Australian economy. We know that we need to do more in the processing of important critical minerals. Aluminium is another one that I personally would like to see on the critical minerals list, not only because I have one of the biggest smelters in the country in my electorate but because I understand how critical aluminium will be in driving the Australian renewables sector. I'm very pleased that the member for Hunter joins me in the chamber tonight because I know that he understands the value of critical minerals to Australia and how we drive our economy forward.</para>
<para>The mining services industry is also so important when it comes to, quite frankly, getting those minerals out of the ground. In the Hunter we have some of the best mining in the world and we will be able to help develop that sector because we will be able to give great information, technology and instruction about mining, particularly when it comes to safety, economy, efficiency and technology. We will help extract those critical and rare minerals out of the ground across Australia, where we can help drive automation, technology and all of the things that we need in a modern world, which we need these rare and critical minerals for.</para>
<para>That's why we're reviewing this strategy. We're looking at it because we need to take not only a whole-of-government but a whole-of-nation approach to make sure that, firstly, we have enough supply of critical minerals and, secondly, we can extract them out of the ground. Thirdly, what do we do with them? How do we actually make things with those critical minerals, not just dig them up, send them away to have them processed overseas and then re-import them, which is what we do now with so many of our critical minerals?</para>
<para>This is where it is very important to have that strategy and consultation, not, as the federal government did before we were elected, to spray money around and make lots of announcements. Quite frankly, it wasn't a critical strategy. It was a strategy that we are very critical of, and we're going to do a much better job of this whole sector, which is so vitally important to our economy moving forward.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RICK WILSON</name>
    <name.id>198084</name.id>
    <electorate>O'Connor</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>On behalf of Western Australians, I want to thank my friend the member for Paterson, and also the member for Hunter, for the coal that will be arriving from Newcastle into Western Australia. Even though we have a billion tonnes of coal in Collie in my electorate, the Western Australian government has managed to arrive at a situation where it's uneconomic to mine that, so we're going to import coal from Newcastle. Thank you very much to those two members.</para>
<para>I'd love to see the Prime Minister stand up in parliament and thank the coal industry and the coalminers for the fantastic work that they do. Coal is the currently the largest-earning mineral that we export out of this nation. I think you members should be very proud of your coalminers. I know the member for Paterson is a coalminer's daughter, and I'd love to see those coalminers recognised for the great work they do for this nation and the amount of income they bring in.</para>
<para>But I digress. We're here today to talk about critical minerals. Of course, critical minerals are, by their very nature and name, critical to some very important current and future industries. The development of electric vehicles is one. For defence technology it's becoming more and more important to have access to those critical minerals for our defence manufacturers, not just here but amongst our very close allies in the United States and other parts of South-East Asia. Critical minerals are needed for solar panels and transmission lines. The current government has a plan to build 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines. I'm sure that if they were going to go through my electorate there'd be plenty of local farmers who'd be unhappy about that, but we'll see how that ends up and how many kilometres they get done in the next eight years. All the technology that we use in the current day and age—obviously, microchips, phones, TVs, computers—relies on these critical minerals.</para>
<para>As previous speakers have mentioned, there is currently one major supplier of critical minerals, and that is our good friend to the north—China. As much as we do and should maintain friendly relations with our neighbours in the north, it is not strategically smart to rely on one particular supplier of a product. Investment in critical minerals is not just about a commercial outcome and an economic outcome for our nation; it is also a very strong strategic investment.</para>
<para>I will touch on a couple of those minerals that we will require going forward. According to the notes I have here, lithium demand will increase by 368 per cent by 2030—I think that's a significant underestimation of the increase in demand, as we see more electric vehicles taken up—copper demand will double by 2050, aluminium demand will double by 2030 and nickel demand will increase by 67 per cent by 2030. All of these minerals are produced very efficiently in my electorate of O'Connor by hardworking miners who are very proud of the work that they do and the contribution that they make to this country. I'm very proud of them and I thank them for the work that they do.</para>
<para>Under the coalition, we recognised the importance of critical minerals and we invested a considerable amount of funds to incentivise and bring on projects. In April 2022, the Morrison government announced a $1.25 billion loan—and I emphasis here: a loan—through the Critical Minerals Facility to develop Australia's first integrated rare earths refinery at Eneabba, which is in the northern part of the wheatbelt in Western Australia and in my very good friend the member for Durack's electorate, and I'm sure she'll mention that.</para>
<para>In the time I have left, I want to talk about the Lynas Rare Earths project, which received $14 million from the Commonwealth government. The important thing about incentivising the Lynas Rare Earths project to relocate from Malaysia to Kalgoorlie—the member for Durack's birth town—and redirect that manufacturing process onshore is that we've not only created jobs and investment in Australia but secured the supply of those critical minerals going forward. It's a great policy, and I'm very sad to see the Labor Party cutting that program by $50 million.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:33</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms MASCARENHAS</name>
    <name.id>298800</name.id>
    <electorate>Swan</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hinkler for giving me the opportunity to speak about a matter of significance to WA, as we have some of the world's largest reserves of lithium, nickel, cobalt and manganese, which are indeed critical minerals. The resource sector is a major employer of my constituents. Before I was the member for Swan, I too worked in the sector, for a mineral sands company. I was also born and bred in the Goldfields. In addition, many people who live in Swan want to see meaningful action on climate change. Australia can play a pivotal role, but we need to ensure we get the policy settings right and orientate the industry towards this massive opportunity.</para>
<para>Unfortunately the coalition's Critical Minerals Strategy was inherently flawed. It did not consult with those in industry, and it neglects the fact that batteries and electrification are essential parts of decarbonisation. Expanding our economy and action on climate change can only be solved with a serious strategy, and that's what we've announced. The future is electric: over the last two years, electric car sales have quadrupled globally. The uptake of electric cars is only going one way—and that's up. Following on from this, Australia's minerals, such as lithium, nickel, cobalt and manganese, are indeed in demand. Renewable energy is increasing its share of the national energy market. The Australian Energy Market Operator's 2022 Integrated System Plan will see a step change from about 30 per cent to about 80 per cent renewable electricity generation in 2030. Again, this will be dependent on lithium, nickel, cobalt and graphite.</para>
<para>If we think long-term and strategically about how we can capture the future benefits of growth for our nation, we'll see we need a strategy that is informed by experts in the sector and empowers communities, especially First Nations people. You can't just provide a 20-page document, announce money, fail to mention climate change, not commit any funding to appropriations and think that, somehow, you will reap the full benefits of this emerging industry. Our Critical Minerals Strategy will inform our battery strategy, acknowledge its role in addressing climate change and develop synergies between the resources sector and manufacturers.</para>
<para>In my electorate we have a battery pilot plant that is upskilling chemical and process engineers so that we have the know-how for the commercial manufacturing of batteries. Throughout WA we have several critical-minerals processing facilities that would benefit from a clear strategy from government. Collie, a town that is shifting away from coal mining, plans to open a graphite processing plant, which has been announced. Our strategy will work with these stakeholders and will ensure that they have a voice in what our advanced decarbonised economy looks like. This will be supported by our government's National Reconstruction Fund, to which we allocated funding in our October budget. We need to do this right because it will mean jobs, jobs and more jobs. This will secure jobs for regional Australia, jobs that workers can be proud of. This pride is something that I witnessed when I visited Mineral Resources Wodgina lithium project a few weeks ago.</para>
<para>Finally, I would like to acknowledge the member for Hinkler's road-to-Damascus moment on batteries. In an interview with Tom Connell on Sky News in 2021 he couldn't give a straight answer on whether batteries for renewable energy would provide dispatchable power. From one engineer to another, I'll give you the technical answer: they do.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:37</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms PRICE</name>
    <name.id>249308</name.id>
    <electorate>Durack</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>Australians are hungry for sustainable energy that is clean and affordable. They want it without raising taxes, without suffering from an electricity grid that cannot keep up with demand and without soaring electricity prices. The coalition understands that. In order to achieve net zero by 2050, significant investment is required to bolster our infrastructure, industries and critical-minerals mining capabilities.</para>
<para>The technology we need to transition successfully to cleaner sources of energy, such as electric vehicles, batteries, solar panels and wind turbines requires a diverse mix of critical minerals. The demand for this resource will only further rise to meet the needs of developed nations across the world that are pursuing their own clean energy agenda. Critical minerals are therefore becoming a highly sought after commodity, placing Australia in a unique position to reap the rewards of these natural resources that are abundant across our nation, especially in my fabulous electorate of Durack.</para>
<para>Whilst in government the coalition recognised the strategic value of ready access to our critical minerals, and it developed policies to drive investment and secure production domestically. It was under the coalition government that a $1.25 billion loan was provided to the Australian company Iluka Resources in my electorate of Durack to develop Australia's first integrated rare earth refinery in Western Australia. The refinery will produce separated rare earth oxide products, which are used in a wide range of technologies, including electric vehicles and clean energy generation. Under the Modern Manufacturing Initiative, the coalition also contributed $49 million towards the Australian Vanadium project to process high-grade vanadium from its Meekatharra mine, which is also in the great electorate of Durack. This highly sought after critical mineral will eventually be transformed into energy-storing batteries to fuel the growing domestic and overseas markets. Not only are these projects shoring up our domestic supply and export opportunities, they are also contributing significantly to the employment opportunities and local economies of the surrounding communities.</para>
<para>It therefore baffles me that Labor have decided to abandon the resources sector, and the hundreds of thousands of workers and families that it supports, by cutting over $100 million from the rebranded Critical Minerals Development Program. Now is not the time to take our foot off the accelerator. A quick rebranding and slashing millions of dollars in funding is counterproductive and puts our climate targets at risk.</para>
<para>Remember, if Minister Bowen's target of renewables making up 82 per cent of the electricity grid by 2030 is to be achieved, we'll need—and these are his words—22,000 solar panels to be installed each and every day for the next eight years, and we will have to install 40 seven-megawatt wind turbines a month. Now, you don't have to be an industrial engineer—I am not one, I can assure you—to see there is a flaw in Labor's logic. Where are we going to get the materials to ensure that Australia reduces its carbon footprint? And why would Labor punish the very industry they need to meet their ambitious targets? If our international partners are not sourcing their critical minerals from Australia, you can guarantee they will be sourcing these critical minerals from other countries, the mining practices of which perhaps don't come close to the standards that we have set ourselves, which, potentially, could drive up emissions further.</para>
<para>Labor needs to stop punishing this crucial sector, drop the politics and continue to build on the hard work that we developed over the last nine years, the good work done by the coalition, to make sure that Australia is known right across the globe as the trusted source, the best source, of critical minerals. Labor should not put that at risk. Drop the politics. Follow our lead.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:41</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>We are the lucky country. Australia's resources of critical minerals rank in the top five globally, and they will be essential in developing renewable energy and clean technology applications, which are a crucial part of today's increasing demands for technological advancements. With global demand growing at a rapid rate, it is an exciting opportunity for the mining sector to work with the energy, transport, aerospace, defence, automotive and telecommunications sectors in order to expand their business and secure investment.</para>
<para>But to do this we need a proper critical minerals strategy. Prior to the adults being elected, the former government made announcements as to the critical minerals plan. However, they failed to appropriate the funding needed to achieve this. Sounds familiar, doesn't it—making announcements without funding. We remember those opposite us running around making promises that they'd made on the back of beer coasters. So we've all been there before. And look—there are none even in here now. Instead of getting on with the job, the priorities of those opposite were solely about getting re-elected; thus, they treated the industry like a cash cow as they sat idly by, doing nothing to protect their workers or take steps to offer the industry longevity. They had more than 21 failed energy policies, which, again, offered the industry no assurance or direction and left Australia in the dark, despite having experts begging to make the investments.</para>
<para>Our budget is a responsible budget. It starts to clean up the mess those opposite left behind and begins to build the future of our Australia that people deserve. This includes the investment of $2 billion in economic benefits and opportunities for Australian families, businesses and communities, as well as new funds to support the growth of clean energy technology, as part of the government's commitment to achieving a 43 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030.</para>
<para>But, unlike those opposite, we will consult with industry experts and ensure that the community's voice is heard, in order to put action behind our promises. Consultation is a good thing. Those opposite shouldn't fear it. This consultation will ensure the future support for the critical minerals industry, ultimately ensuring a coordinated and collaborative approach with the stakeholders to our strategic development.</para>
<para>Our government is investing in critical minerals, such as lithium, cobalt, magnesium and titanium, and rare earths, to enhance Australia's world-class resources sector, diversify global supply chains and meet our growing demands. Our updated funding profile is vital to give our scientific experts more time to develop and deliver on projects, including working with the research community to address technical challenges, which will help reduce the risks involved in delivering these projects and ensure they provide strong scientific and technical outcomes. To maximise these research outcomes, the hub aims to better engage with universities and other researchers, drawing on their insights and expertise. The Critical Minerals Development Program has also been reframed to more closely reflect our objectives, incorporating Australia's decarbonisation opportunity, gender equality and Indigenous participation to ensure that this plan is strengthened across the board to finally give the industry the world-class standards it deserves.</para>
<para>Furthermore, a key role for the hub is to engage with our international partners to progress our research and develop collaboration, which is highly sought after by like-minded countries, including our key trading partners. This, in turn, will provide a welcome pathway for companies involved to access additional incentives through Australia's flag ship R&D program, encouraging businesses to conduct additional activities they may not have undertaken, which initiates space for new knowledge, boosts technological improvements and increases productivity within the Australian economy. Our government is an active government which follows through with its commitments.</para>
<para>I have great faith that together we can fix this steaming pile of mess that the former government left us and bring to light this transparent critical minerals plan that strives to ensure Australia remains a global powerhouse by achieving stable supply, sovereign capabilities and regional growth to face the increase in global demands head on with a thriving yet sustainable Australian critical minerals sector. I'll ensure that your voices will be heard.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:46</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Hinkler for bringing this matter to the House's attention, and I'm indebted to energy minister Chris Bowen for a moment of clarity a few weeks back when he informed us that by 2030 Australia would need to build 40 new seven-megawatts wind towers a month and install 22,500-megawatt PV panels a day—these are the ones about 1.6 metres square. Just for your information, Deputy Speaker, and in case anyone else is interested, that would be 25,000 acres of solar panels. It's estimated that by 2025 95 per cent of PV panels produced in the world will come from China. Similarly, neodymium, a rare earth essential for the magnets that are used in wind towers—in the 40 wind towers we're going to build a month in this country—and that rare earth market, like the PV market, is actually controlled by China at the moment. Our dependence on another country, one that is already operating trade sanctions against us, for the supply of photovoltaic cells, lithium batteries and other components should not be acceptable to this nation.</para>
<para>Australia has many of the raw materials that we need to provide sovereign capacity in these new industrial opportunities to get to a point of self-reliability. Our deposits of lithium, graphite, rare earths, copper, aluminium and nickel along with many others should be exploited, which leaves me astonished Labor's first budget has cut $100 million from the Critical Minerals Strategy. It was a $200 million fund. Five hundred and fifty million dollars of that has already been invested, and the budget tells us that, instead of spending another $150 million, there will be only $50 million left in forward funding projects. That is a pretty heavy cut by any standards, and at a time when these opportunities are in front of us in the world. And not only opportunities; I think they are essential actions by government to control our destiny in front of us, and we need to move in a positive manner.</para>
<para>On the matter of lithium batteries, Australia has the Future Battery Industries Cooperative Research Centre. It's based in Perth. It has proven lithium batteries are the best on offer in the world at the moment. But we don't make them here in Australia, and that's what the CRC is looking at. We can expect that market, with electric vehicles coming on, to expand exponentially. Lithium batteries are primarily made from graphite—that's the major component—and then lithium, nickel, cobalt, alumina and a number of other rare earths. All of these are minerals Australia has. We have the potential to increase supply and not just increase supply but actually go into the further manufacturing.</para>
<para>I was delighted, in fact, that Renascor Resources scored a $200 million loan underwritten by the Critical Minerals Strategy for the development of Siviour graphite mine, which is near Arno Bay in my electorate—in fact, not very far from where I go to the beach, quite frankly. I lived in Arno Bay for a couple of years, even! That mine looks like it's going ahead. I'm doubtful that it would have gone ahead without the Critical Minerals Strategy. I'm very pleased to have seen that happen. Others hoping for similar treatment from the fund, of course, are facing the fact that it has now been pretty severely cut.</para>
<para>We have a government that is spruiking Australia's critical minerals future, our manufacturing industries and the potential to expand it, but they've cut the support for the critical minerals sector and preside over a 56 per cent increase in electricity costs while reducing support for the development of new gas supplies. All of those things are not leading to an increase in manufacturing; they are leading to a hit in the back of the neck to manufacturing. I deplore this decision by the government.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:51</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">M</name>
    <name.id>157125</name.id>
    <electorate>Pearce</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>s ROBERTS () (): As a Western Australian, I would like to say how proud I am that Western Australia has become known as the engine room of the Australian economy and produces 57 per cent of the world's lithium.</para>
<para>For the record, let me remind everyone about the actions of the former government which hurt Western Australia. The Morrison government dropped the resources portfolio out of cabinet. The former government played politics with the resources sector and dropped it like a hot potato. Not only that, the former Liberal-National government previously had two resources ministers. The member for Cook appointed himself as a resources minister to overrule his own appointee, the member for Hinkler. Perhaps this is why the Critical Minerals Strategy failed to discuss net-zero and decarbonisation, or maybe why the former government did not consult anyone on the strategy. Someone might have advised them that these minerals are essential for net-zero. That must have gone against the narrative, and now they're in opposition. The Australian people rightly rejected and are right to be angry about the behaviour from the previous government, the 22 failed energy policies and the lack of action on climate change. Ten years of inflamed tensions and cheap politics—a wasted Liberal decade.</para>
<para>The Australian people deserve a comprehensive strategy and a national approach. The Labor government budget last month is responsible and begins to build the better future that the Australian people deserve. Australia has some of the world's largest reserves of critical minerals. The government is creating a new Critical Minerals Strategy. Unlike the former government, we will consult industry, experts and communities, including traditional owners, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, who are a core partner in mining and industry as a major stakeholder in transforming the economic and health disparity of traditional custodians and their communities.</para>
<para>These consultations will inform future action for the critical minerals industry. This will ensure a coordinated and collaborative approach with key stakeholders to critical minerals development. New initiatives will expand Australia's mining science technology capabilities, diversify supply chains, create local jobs and help drive growth in the critical minerals sector, including rare earth minerals, a key component of low-emission technologies such as batteries, electric vehicles and solar panels.</para>
<para>In the meantime, the Critical Minerals Development Program will support early­ and mid-stage critical minerals projects. It will establish the Australian Critical Minerals Research and Development Hub to help unlock our nation's critical-minerals potential. Research and development projects are often technically complex and challenging. The updated funding profile will give our scientific experts more time to develop and deliver projects, including to work with the research community and industry. This will reduce the risk in delivering the projects and ensure that they provide strong scientific and technical outcomes.</para>
<para>This government is setting the critical-minerals sector up for success, not for failure. It will create jobs and attract investment. Australia has some of the world's largest reserves of critical minerals but will face significant competition for the capital required to develop these assets. A recent Bank of America report shows global investment in mining needs to double—from US$80 billion per annum currently to US$160 billion per annum—in order to satisfy the growing demands from renewable energy generation and storage and electric vehicles.</para>
<para>The Albanese Labor government's new strategy will focus on the broad policy settings required for Australia to maximise its share of this investment opportunity, ensuring that Australia remains an attractive investment destination. The International Energy Agency projects mineral demand for use in electric vehicles and battery storage could grow at least 30 times to 2040. Australia is the world's largest lithium producer, and latest figures forecast the value of lithium exports are due to increase more than tenfold over two years, from $1.1 billion in 2021 to almost $14 billion in 2022-23, with continued growth over future years. The development of a battery industry could contribute $7.4 billion annually to our economy and support 34,700 jobs by 2030.</para>
<para>Our community has voted for responsible, respectful government.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is interrupted. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Forestry Industry</title>
          <page.no>152</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>18:57</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr RYAN</name>
    <name.id>297660</name.id>
    <electorate>Kooyong</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I move:</para>
<quote><para class="block">That this House:</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(1) acknowledges the devastation caused by ongoing native forest logging in this country;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(2) commits to protecting our native forests from logging;</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(3) abolishes the effective exemption from environment laws that has been granted to native forest logging currently covered by regional forestry agreements between the federal and state governments; and</para></quote>
<quote><para class="block">(4) further commits to implementing the recommendations of the Independent Review of the <inline font-style="italic">Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999</inline>, as soon as possible, to arrest the decline of our iconic places and the extinction of our most threatened plants, animals, and ecosystems.</para></quote>
<para>Deforestation is the third-largest source of carbon emissions globally. To meet our target of a 43 per cent reduction by 2030, Australia must reduce its carbon emissions by 15 megatons each year. Each year we log two per cent of our native forests, resulting in the release of 15 megatons of carbon dioxide. We could meet our 2030 emissions reduction target simply by stopping native forest logging.</para>
<para>The native forests of the central highlands of Victoria are among the most carbon-dense forests in the world. Cessation of the native forest logging industry in Victoria would result in emissions savings equivalent to taking 730,000 cars off the road every year and ceasing logging in Tasmania would result in emissions savings equivalent to taking 1.1 million cars off the road every year.</para>
<para>This motion proposes the abolition of the effective exemption from the national environment laws that has been granted to native forest logging currently covered by regional forestry agreements, RFAs, between the federal and state governments. It also commits to implementing the recommendations of the Independent Review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 as soon as possible to arrest the decline of our iconic places and the extinction of our most threatened plants, animals and ecosystems.</para>
<para>RFAs are 20-year state-federal agreements underpinning the management of most of Australia's commercially productive native forests. They aimed to deliver certainty of resource access to forest industries and to ensure that those industries were profitable and protective of environmental values. The objectives of RFAs have not been met. They have failed to protect biodiversity and to maintain ecosystem processes. They have been associated with poor governance and abject forest protection. They've overseen the loss of profitability of, and declining employment in, native forest logging industries. They've led to the overcommitment of forest resources to wood production and failed to account for other forest values which outweigh those of wood production. Eighty-seven per cent of native forest logs from states like Victoria are used for woodchips and for paper production. Only 7.5 per cent are used for saw logs. We have alternative sources of wood products, recycled paper and plantation timber. We have to use those and stop logging our native forests. The economic value of our native forests for carbon storage is far greater than the value of those forests for woodchips and for pulp.</para>
<para>Victoria had one mega fire in the 1800s and one in the 1900s. We have already had three this century. Thirty per cent of everything planned to be logged in the next five years in Victoria was burned in the Black Summer bushfires. Victoria has lost over 77 per cent of its old-growth forests in the last 25 years. Forests are more flammable for up to 70 years after they are logged and regenerated. Logging creates a greater risk of more severe bushfires, which endanger people's lives and property and lead to further carbon emissions. The extreme flammability of our landscapes means that there is no certainty of wood supply for a collapsing timber industry. Our backup resources have been lost through over cutting and recurrent fires.</para>
<para>The industry loses large amounts of money. In 2020 the PBO estimated that immediately ending native forestry in Victoria could save as much as $190 million over a decade. Logging in Victoria, which is planned five years ahead, is now taking place in areas of the highest habitat and conservation value for 70 threatened forest-dependent species. These include Victoria's animal emblem, the critically endangered Leadbeater's possum, and the endangered southern greater glider. The key threatening process for other marsupials is the accelerated loss of hollow trees. Old-growth forests support significantly greater numbers of animal species than regrowth forests. Logging also has major impacts on forest soils causing erosion and loss of water sources.</para>
<para>Using our native forests for carbon storage rather than logging will still require a major skilled workforce for Australia. This workforce can manage our carbon stocks and storage, repair the damage from soil erosion and extreme sedimentation, protect water catchments. We can maintain and expand the workforces associated with the forestry sector in climate-appropriate ways. Protecting and restoring our native forests is a crucial mitigation strategy for us to meet our net zero emission targets. We need the vision to embrace it.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>265980</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>Is the motion seconded?</para>
</interjection>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Ms Daniel</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I second the motion.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:02</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr REPACHOLI</name>
    <name.id>298840</name.id>
    <electorate>Hunter</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>The Albanese government supports strong plantation forestry and sustainable native forestry and is investing over $300 million in the 2022-23 budget for forest industry innovation, manufacturing and workforce skills to support these sectors into the future. This is because we know that a well-managed forest balances social, economic and environmental outcomes. That is, well-managed forests support jobs while maintaining ecosystems for Australia's unique plants and animals and have an important role to play in reducing Australia's emissions.</para>
<para>In committing to the future of a sustainable native forest industry, we recognise that such a future has been made possible by the regional forest agreements. These agreements are widely accepted by the Commonwealth, state governments and industry as the best mechanism to balance the long-term social, economic and environmental interests of Australia's native forests. Since the establishment of the RFA, the area of native forest in our conservation reserve has almost doubled from 5.4 million hectares before the agreements were signed to 10 million hectares in 2019. Almost 50 per cent of native forests in the RFA regions are now in reserves. The 10 agreements across Western Australia, Victoria, Tasmania and New South Wales cover state, environmental and forest management legislative regimes that provide protection for matters of environmental significance.</para>
<para>The Albanese government will respond to the independent Samuel review by the end of this year to ensure certainty and efficiency for both environmental and economic outcomes. While Victoria and WA have indicated their intention to cease their respective RFAs in 2030 and 2024, it is worth noting that many factors inform these decisions, not least economic returns and decreasing supply. This is why the Albanese government is investing in the future of our plantation forestry sector through the 2022-23 budget with $86.2 million for new plantations, $100 million for an Australia-wide National Institute of Forest Products Innovation to support research to produce transformative outcomes for the industry across the country and $10 million for forestry workforce training and skills development.</para>
<para>Additionally, we are committed to removing the water rule, in order to enable greater plantation and farm forestry and increase participation in the Emissions Reduction Fund. By encouraging plantation expansion and farm forestry across Australia, the Albanese government is looking to shore up Australia's timber future. How we look to implement the removal of the water rule will be informed by the consultation process currently underway. That is because the Albanese government listens to those most affected by policy change. We are informed by the evidence and we are committed to delivering on our promises.</para>
<para>Timber supply issues are a key concern impacting many communities along the eastern seaboard. The lack of a domestic source of construction-grade and appearance-grade timber, much of which is sourced from the native forestry sector, is impacting the rebuild efforts following the 2019 and 2020 Black Summer bushfires and the current flooding events. This situation highlights the importance of the Albanese government's budget measures to support forestry industries, given the environmental need to displace plastic products into the future, make the best use of forest harvest and continue to evolve innovation in forest product manufacturing.</para>
<para>As Australia's plantations are not currently able to replace the type and quality of wood produced from native forests, the Albanese government is investing in forestry workers and product manufacturers to grow the skills and innovation that we need right here at home. Native forestry supports thousands of regional jobs across Australia, not including the many roles involved in the secondary processing of wood products or the many scientific roles in the sector. Australia also recognises the value of native forestry to our international obligations. These are the reasons why the Albanese government is committed to a long-term future of sustainable native forest industry and to balance a long-term social economic and social interests of our native forest.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:07</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Ms DANIEL</name>
    <name.id>008CH</name.id>
    <electorate>Goldstein</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Kooyong, and I rise to speak in support of her motion on native forest logging. Australia's native forest are not only a national treasure, they are natural resource. They are not a resource in the sense that is traditionally understood but as a significant way of meeting the challenge of addressing climate change. As the member for Kooyong pointed out, 87 per cent of native forest logs are used for woodchips and paper production. A mere 7.5 per cent are used for sawlogs. Every year around two per cent of our native forests are logged, which the experts calculate results in 15 megatonnes of CO2. According to David Lindenmayer, the respected conservation biologist from ANU, who's been tracking this subject for years, and fellow researchers Brendan Mackey and Heather Keith from Griffith University, stopping the logging of native forests on its own would come close to enabling Australia to achieve its legislated target of a reduction of 43 per cent in carbon emissions by 2030.</para>
<para>Here's the argument. To get to 43 per cent Australia needs to reduce carbon emissions by around 15.3 megatonnes of CO2 over each of the next nine years. Ending native forest logging now would result in an annual reduction of around 15 megatonnes of CO2, not that w   e should be resting on that, because we all know that the 43 per cent target—good start that it may be—is not adequate to get to net zero by mid-century. Furthermore, native forest logging is highly destructive and unsustainable. It contributes to threatening species, contaminating water catchments and irreversible damage to ancient and unique forest ecosystems.</para>
<para>In my home state of Victoria the forests are home to the Leadbeater's possum, the state's faunal emblem. Logging over the decades has irreparably reduced and eliminated the possum's habitat to such an extent that Leadbeater's possum is now critically endangered. Imagine a state whose emblem is extinct—not a record anyone could be proud of; as bad as Tasmania's record with the thylacine, perhaps, although at least the citizens of my childhood home of Tassie never made it a state symbol. And it doesn't end there. The greater glider is vulnerable to extinction on both state and federal registers. In Gippsland in Victoria, the population has declined by 50 per cent. Victoria's mountain ash forests themselves are designated as endangered on the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List.</para>
<para>It need not have been this way. The forests of Victoria, Tasmania and New South Wales are subject to regional forest agreements, designed decades ago under shared management by federal and state governments. Unfortunately, these RFAs effectively exempt native forest logging from the environmental protection requirements of the EPBC Act. Other extractive industries, like mining, for example, do have to comply. Victoria is the most cleared state in the country and none of the five RFAs have met their environmental protection objectives. The independent review of the EPBC Act, conducted by Graeme Samuel, argued this was a loophole that should be closed. His report suggested that the federal government should require RFAs to adhere to the national environmental standards of the EPBC Act, which set benchmarks for effective environmental protection and management, as well as prescribing the baseline support needed to achieve the benchmarks.</para>
<para>And that's the intention of this motion proposed by the member for Kooyong: to ensure that native forest logging in RFA areas is subject to the same environmental laws as all other industries. It's not an oversight; it's a grievous error, which has had terrible consequences. It has not protected the forests, and nor has it really helped forestry. The industry is less and less profitable and in decline.</para>
<para>Communities also need appropriate management to assist this part of our climate transition. We need native forests in place to assist materially in helping us meet our climate change responsibilities. Many members of my community in Goldstein have raised the issue of decreasing biodiversity, and I stand here on your behalf today. I urge the government to act, and I will continue to advocate for what is left of these forests to be protected when the government updates the EPBC Act.</para>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:12</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Dr HAINES</name>
    <name.id>282335</name.id>
    <electorate>Indi</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I thank the member for Kooyong for bringing forward this very important motion for debate this evening. In the north-east of Victoria, in my electorate of Indi, we have some of Australia's most precious native forest landscapes—the stunning <inline font-style="italic">Eucalyptus </inline><inline font-style="italic">regnans</inline>, mountain ash, forests of the Central Highlands; the <inline font-style="italic">Eucalyptus </inline><inline font-style="italic">pauciflora</inline>, snow gums, of the high country; and the beautiful <inline font-style="italic">Eucalyptus </inline><inline font-style="italic">sideroxylon</inline>, ironbark, forests around Chiltern. These stunning forests are part of the fabric of our land.</para>
<para>At the same time, forestry is a major part of the culture and economy of Indi, including both native forest logging and plantation logging. Many of my constituents are employed directly in logging, and even more jobs are supported indirectly by the industry.</para>
<para>As I speak on this motion this evening, I'm thinking of the critically important native forests and the way in which they must be protected, but also of the communities who rely on those forests and their connection to the bush, which, in many cases, is generations deep. I believe we must manage the sector carefully to respect the people in our region who derive their livelihood from native forest logging, whilst recognising that the industry must and will be phased out.</para>
<para>I must state that I believe in a thriving, sustainable Australian forestry sector. Australia has the land, the workforce, the resources, the science and the experience to sustain forestry as a major primary-commodity industry and a major export industry. The question is: how do we do this among the many challenges ahead, recognising that the value of our native forests, both environmentally and economically, is when those forests stay standing?</para>
<para>The <inline font-style="italic">State of the </inline><inline font-style="italic">environment</inline> report, released earlier this year, painted an alarming picture of environmental decline, and land clearing was singled out as a primary driver. We will not have a thriving forestry or a thriving agricultural sector if we continue to eradicate our forests and native vegetation at such rates. Logging native forests poses many risks to our natural environment, increases our carbon emissions and destroys habitats of endangered species. I'm deeply troubled by the court rulings that found that VicForests, which manages our native forestry sector, is failing in its responsibilities to protect native wildlife. While Victoria is failing to implement its commitments under the regional forestry agreements, the Commonwealth is failing to withhold accreditation of Victoria's forest management regime, thereby allowing failure to continue.</para>
<para>Research has persuasively demonstrated that, by replacing older and wetter forests with younger and drier forests, native logging contributed to the extent and severity of the terrible bushfires that our region experienced in 2019-20. The Victorian government is phasing out native logging by 2030, which will drive an increase in plantation forestry and a transition in the processing sector from native timbers to pine and other species. It's vital that we get this transition right, both for the environment and for our local economies. Plantation forestry, mostly of radiata pine, is a significant employer in Indi, supporting thousands of jobs in towns like Benalla, Wangaratta and Myrtleford and across the Upper Murray. After the plantation sector was hard hit by the 2019-20 fires, I worked hard to secure $10.4 million in recovery funding to protect thousands of jobs across these towns. I support the plantation based forestry sector, and I believe that the transition from native to fully plantation based industry, if properly managed, will be good news for Indi, delivering both greater environmental protection and an economic boost for our region.</para>
<para>But a plan should be in place before we cease native forest logging activities, to enable those workers to transition to meaningful work with options to remain associated with the Australian bush in new ways. Those who work in forestry have skills we will need into the future. Forest management will be needed to regenerate logging coupes and unused tracks; for firefighting, and feral animal and plant control; for measuring carbon stocks; for outreach programs for farmers to plant trees and provide carbon sinks; and for supporting new tourism infrastructure, to showcase the uniqueness of the bush to visitors at home and abroad—to name just a few things. We need to do all of these things—keep our forests healthy and sustain both the forestry and agricultural sectors into the future—and do this in a way that strengthens our natural landscapes and protects our ecology. The challenges are many and will require everyone to work together.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has expired.</para>
<para>Debate interrupted.</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1><subdebate.1><subdebateinfo>
          <title>Global Methane Pledge</title>
          <page.no>155</page.no>
        </subdebateinfo><speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:17</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
    <electorate>Grey</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>RAMSEY (—) (): I have to say that this agreement by the government to reduce methane output by 30 per cent—and I point out at this stage that 30 per cent of Australia's methane emissions come from agriculture—just came from nowhere. We had no idea they were going to do it before the election, and they have no idea how we're going to get there, how much it's going to cost or who's going to pay for it. It goes with a list that I've compiled of a number of other things we didn't know about before the election, like giving New Zealanders the vote, or bringing back the foreign fighters—we didn't know about that—or withdrawing recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, or bringing back pattern bargaining—we didn't hear about that before the election—or the expansion of the area of workforce shortage for foreign-trained doctors to get them into the suburbs of our major cities, rather than preserving them for country areas, or the locking up of 30 per cent of Australia in parks and reserves, up from 20 per cent. We didn't hear any of this stuff before the election. And then, of course, on top of that, now we get the 30 per cent reduction in cow belches and—flatulence, let me say.</para>
<para>It's worth noting—I've done a few numbers on this—as we are pushing towards areas of dealing with climate change, that 200 nations at COP26 agreed to beef up their plans for CO2 reduction this year. Thus far, only 12 per cent have done so. When you hear the phrase 'all the world is doing it', all the world is about 12 per cent of the world's population. There are about a billion people in the world who live in countries that are taking climate change and CO2 reduction seriously. The other six billion are going the other way. Otherwise we wouldn't have record prices and record production for coal and gas. That's a clear indication that all the world is not doing it. Around 12 per cent of the world are engaged seriously with reducing CO2, including Australia. Before the change of government, I might say, we did have a 23 per cent reduction on 2005 levels and would have achieved around 33 per cent.</para>
<para>There are some positives in this story. I know the government is hanging its hat on <inline font-style="italic">Asparagopsis taxiformis</inline>, the red seaweed. There is a lot of interest in my electorate, and there are companies there that are looking to produce it at the moment. There's been a feedlot that has done some trial work on this very recently, HP Rural. We will see their produce on supermarket shelves around this week or next week in South Australia. It's worth noting—</para>
<para>An honourable member: Algae?</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr RAMSEY</name>
    <name.id>HWS</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>It's a seaweed. Anyway, a cow needs around 50 grams of this a day. That's not much, but there are 28 million cattle in Australia. If you extrapolate that out, that's about half a million tonnes a year. We know this seaweed is capable of reducing methane emissions. What we don't know is whether it can be produced at scale or whether it can be produced at a price. What we also know is that it's quite easy to administer this or give it to cattle in a feedlot situation, but at any given time only 4.6 per cent of Australia's cattle are in a feedlot; the other 95.4 per cent are actually out grazing on rangeland. There is no known way that I'm aware of for delivering that feed supplement at this stage. I know the CSIRO are looking at trying to add it to water, but you've got to remember that it's a solid. Whether or not it's going to sit in water and actually disseminate itself amongst cattle is a real question.</para>
<para>The reason I bring this up is that people get so enthusiastic so far in front of the case. There's nothing wrong with being enthusiastic, but in this case the government has actually made a decision which ties in Australia. What if <inline font-style="italic">Asparagopsis</inline> doesn't work? Where are we left then? Are we left where New Zealand are, talking about a tax on prime production? When I talk about this optimism, it was only a few years ago that the whole of Australia was going to be running on hot rocks. I don't know the last time you turned on your power point powered by hot rocks. <inline font-style="italic">(Time expired)</inline></para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:23</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
    <electorate>Macnamara</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>It was quite a journey, and it's late on a Monday night, but goodness me the member for Grey just gave us a snapshot as to exactly why a big chunk of his colleagues are no longer sitting in this place. His colleagues on that side of the House, like the members for Wentworth, Goldstein and Higgins, faced electorates that were sick of the ridiculous hyperbole that we just heard from the member for Grey. He's not interested in actual reasoned discussion about why we need to do our bit as part of the international efforts to tackle climate change; he's just interested in a long, rambling contribution that didn't address the issue.</para>
<para>President Biden had this initiative to try and reduce the amount of methane that the international community is emitting. We know methane is a really powerful greenhouse gas, and we know that we need to reduce it. The 30 by 30 methane pledge is one that signals to the rest of the world that Australia is back. Australia takes its responsibilities on emission reduction seriously. We are here to work with our international counterparts in order to do what's required and in order to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the global efforts to tackle climate change.</para>
<para>The member opposite did mention a few of the different initiatives as to how we do that. Obviously there are a range of methane emissions throughout our economy. A lot of emissions seep out during production in fossil fuel industries but there is also the agricultural sector, which plays a relatively significant part in methane production in Australia. In the budget we are investing $8 million in the Sustainable Seaweed Alliance to help commercialise livestock feed with asparagopsis seaweed, which has the potential to reduce methane production by more than 95 per cent. It's a really sensible initiative, and we will wait and see the outcomes of that.</para>
<para>Along with the our efforts to try and bring down the amount of emissions of our heavy emitters, we have said exactly what we are going to do and to bring industry along with us. We know how important it is to bring our regional communities along, and I am proud that the Hunter Valley has a Labor member. Those communities must have strong representatives fighting for them, like my friend the member for Paterson sitting here, and indeed, you, Deputy Speaker Claydon, representing the good burgers of Newcastle.</para>
<para>We are looking for new technology to invest in to bring our agricultural sector with us. We know how important our agriculture sector is in Australia, unlike those opposite, who are really not offering forward-thinking solutions about how we can work with industry to tackle climate change as part of the international community's efforts to tackle climate change. The only thing those opposite have is hyperbole, fear campaigns and the sort of rubbish we just heard from the previous speaker, and not just the previous speaker, but the Leader of the Nationals, the member for New England before the last election as well. His contribution to this debate wasn't reasoned. The National Farmers' Federation said farmers are leading the charge on climate change and have earned a seat at the table. The strong assurances and partnership provided by the government means the pledge will not negatively impact farmers or the agricultural sector. That was what the National Farmers' Federation said was reasonable. It was serious. They are clearly taking the potential anxieties of the sector seriously. Let's just contrast that with the member for New England, who said, 'Grab a rifle, go out and start shooting your cattle.' That was the contribution from the member for New England.</para>
<continue>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">Mr BURNS</name>
    <name.id>278522</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>I will ignore the interjections from the member for Kennedy. We are working with industry and with the agricultural sector. We will work with the big polluters but we will also work with the international community to make sure Australia is doing its bit. It's what our responsibility is. Instead of the doom and gloom we heard from those opposite, instead of the climate denial, the decade of climate denial is over. Australia is back. We are a responsible international citizen and we will do our bit to tackle it, including the 30 x 30 methane pledge.</para>
</continue>
</speech>
<speech>
  <talker>
    <time.stamp>19:28</time.stamp>
    <name role="metadata">Mr PIKE</name>
    <name.id>300120</name.id>
    <electorate>Bowman</electorate>
  </talker>
  <para>I have read Minister Bowen's media release of 23 October, where he claims the Global Methane Pledge is a voluntary commitment that promotes an aspirational target of reducing global methane emissions across all sectors by at least 30 per cent below 2020 levels by 2030. That all sounds fairly benign. If you listen to the previous speaker's contribution, certainly it all sounds very benign and very friendly. We will continue to decide how we manage and regulate methane-intensive sectors such as energy waste disposal in agriculture, principally livestock, but also crops such as rice.</para>
<para>The devil is always in the detail and, even in the minister's own media release, there is significant cause for concern, where the aspiration clearly aims for reductions of at least 30 per cent and it makes mention that it is across all sectors by 2030. So even the minister concedes that his pledge is not just about the capture of waste methane in energy and waste sectors but that the government will ruthlessly target all sectors in a ham-fisted search for errant methane molecules. Top of the minister's all-sector hit list will be agriculture. Agriculture was our first industry and, while it accounts for 48 per cent of Australia's human-related methane emissions, it is worth noting that it is worth $70 billion to our national economy.</para>
<para>Looking a little closer, if it becomes apparent that Labor's principle target within the agricultural sector is the livestock industry, which alone contributes over $1.6 billion to our economy. Along with Labor's prime target, mining supports thousands of communities.</para>
<interjection>
  <talker>
    <name role="metadata">The DEPUTY SPEAKER</name>
    <name.id>248181</name.id>
  </talker>
  <para>The time allotted for this debate has now expired.</para>
<para>Federation Chamber adjourned at [19:30]</para>
</interjection>
</speech>
</subdebate.1></debate>
  </fedchamb.xscript>
</hansard>