2023-02-09 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 0

Thursday, 9 February 2023

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Milton Dick ) took the chair at 09:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

BILLS 475 BILLS Housing Australia Future Fund Bill 2023 475

Housing Australia Future Fund Bill 2023

First Reading 475 Second Reading 475 09:02 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Today marks a turning point. With the bills I introduce today, this government is turning the page on a wasted decade of national housing policy in Australia. A decade of dithering; a decade of delay; a decade of failing to address Australia's housing affordability challenges. The consequences of the previous government's failures to act seriously on housing have led to significant challenges across the country. We know this because we see and hear it every day—rising rents; increasing homelessness; and home ownership out of reach for ordinary Australians. Housing problems are now widespread and visible to all of us. And across our country's cities and towns, the dream of a secure home has become so much harder. Harder for the 116,000 Australians experiencing homelessness. Harder for workers forced to move further and further away from their place of employment. Harder for businesses that want to hire but are finding there just isn't somewhere affordable for new workers to live. And harder for the hundreds of thousands of Australians on social housing waiting lists with no certainty and no place to call home. Behind these housing statistics are the devastating stories of people—Australians who don't have a place to call home. The growing number of older women who, through no fault of their own, can't afford to put a roof over their head. Vulnerable women and children who are escaping family violence but are being turned away from emergency accommodation. And some are our nation's veterans, who have bravely served our nation abroad, but can't find somewhere affordable to call home in Australia. For too long these terrible stories have been ignored by the Australian government. But today is a turning point because instead of another wasted decade, this government won't waste a day working to meet these challenges. At the centre of our new government's housing agenda, and enshrined in this bill, is the creation of the Housing Australia Future Fund. The structure of the fund will protect it from the whims of future governments. The fund will generate returns over the long term, which will allow it to provide annual disbursements to deliver a secure pipeline of funding for social and affordable housing in Australia. This will provide critical certainty to Australia's community housing providers and the scale of the investment will invite new contributions to social and affordable housing from institutional investors. The fund will be the end of the housing one-offs from the Australian government. It will be the end of Australian government housing programs that make problems worse instead of better. Instead, the Housing Australia Future Fund will be the start of an enduring promise from the Australian government—that more Australians should have a safe and affordable place to call home. Those of us on this side of the House came to government with another promise, and one to the Australian people which we intend to keep: a better future. The introduction of today's bills keeps faith with this promise. I will now outline the functions of this bill. The Housing Australia Future Fund is one aspect of the government's commitment to improving housing supply and affordability. Central to this is the aim of increasing the supply of social and affordable homes and investing more in acute housing needs. As announced in the October 2022-23 budget, disbursements from the Housing Australia Future Fund will be used to fund social and affordable homes and other acute housing needs. In the first five years of operation, the government intends to use disbursements from the Housing Australia Future Fund to help build: 20,000 homes to provide social housing—4,000 of which will be allocated to women and children leaving domestic and family violence and older women on low incomes who are at risk of homelessness; and 10,000 affordable homes for frontline workers like police, nurses and cleaners who kept us safe during the pandemic. The National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation, which will be renamed Housing Australia, will be responsible for administering the majority of disbursements from the Housing Australia Future Fund to help build the 30,000 social and affordable homes in the fund's first five years. Over the same period, the fund will also provide: $200 million for the repair, maintenance and improvements of housing in remote Indigenous communities; $100 million for crisis and transitional housing options for women and children leaving domestic and family violence and older women on low incomes who are at risk of homelessness; and $30 million to build housing and fund specialist services for veterans experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness. The bill establishes the Housing Australia Future Fund and provides an initial credit of $10 billion. Disbursements from the fund will be made available for the purposes of funding social and affordable homes and other acute housing needs. Under this bill, annual disbursements will be capped at $500 million per annum to protect the balance of the fund and ensure a sustainable source of funding into the future. The legislation will require five-yearly reviews of the operation of the act, which will assess the extent to which the fund is meeting the social, affordable and acute housing needs of Australians. The Housing Australia Future Fund will be managed by the Future Fund Board of Guardians, which has a proven track record of managing investment funds on behalf of the people of Australia and maximising returns over the long term. The bill requires the Treasurer and the Minister for Finance to issue directions setting out the government's expectations as to how the fund will be managed and invested by the board, including setting a new benchmark rate of return for the fund. Any disbursements from the fund will require formal government approval. As part of the annual budget process the housing minister, in consultation with the Treasurer and the finance minister, will be responsible for bringing forward proposals for the government's consideration of the allocation of disbursements to deliver on the government's targets for social and affordable homes and acute housing needs. The bulk of annual disbursements from the fund will be allocated to Housing Australia to deliver on the government's social and affordable housing commitments. Allocations to Housing Australia will recognise that a minimum annual amount over the long term is likely to be required to deliver on those commitments. In relation to the acute housing needs, the housing minister will also consult the other designated ministers—the Minister for Social Services, the Minister for Indigenous Australians and the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. The housing minister will also consider advice from the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council before bringing forward spending proposals. The government established the interim council by administrative arrangements from 1 January 2023. The council will be established in primary legislation as part of this housing package. The council will be an independent and expert advisory body to the government, to inform spending from the Housing Australia Future Fund and provide policy advice on housing supply and affordability. It has already begun building a strong evidence base to support the Commonwealth in developing housing policy and position the government to provide an important leadership role in increasing housing supply and improving housing affordability in close collaboration with the states and territories. The bill will also establish the Housing Australia Future Fund Payments Special Account to make grants in relation to acute housing needs. Following a decision of government to allocate disbursements from the fund, the designated ministers will request that the agreed amounts be debited from the Housing Australia Future Fund Special Account and credited to the Housing Australia Future Fund Payments Special Account for the purpose of making grants. The designated ministers and the housing minister will also be able to request that a grant to a state or territory be channelled through the COAG Reform Fund. Payments to Housing Australia will be transferred to the Housing Australia Special Account for the purposes of making grants and loans for social and affordable homes and acute housing needs. All funding decisions will comply with the Commonwealth's established rules and guidelines for grants. Detailed information on grants under the Housing Australia Future Fund will be published online. Too many Australians struggle to secure safe and affordable housing, which is why we are committed to establishing the Housing Australia Future Fund along with other significant housing reforms such as the new National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, a National Housing and Homelessness Plan, and a Help to Buy scheme. The introduction of this legislation builds on the work we have already begun to address Australia's housing challenges: Our action to immediately unlock up to $575 million from the National Housing Infrastructure Facility for social and affordable housing; Our decision to bring forward the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee by three months, which has already helped more than 1,700 Australians into homeownership; The formation of the interim National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, which has already begun its work to deliver independent advice to government; and National Cabinet's decision to re-establish the Housing and Homelessness Ministerial Council and the three meetings I have already held with my state and territory colleagues. Delivering on the establishment of the Housing Australia Future Fund along with the other housing reforms will mean more Australians will have a safe and affordable place to call home. Full details of the bill are contained in the explanatory memorandum. Home is the foundation from which we build our lives. Without a stable home, people—no matter their age—struggle to live in good health, stay in training or education, or find and keep jobs. That's not good for them, for their families, for their communities or for our country. I know this, because I have lived it. The Prime Minister knows this, because he has lived it. It's why this government is serious about making sure more Australians have a safe, affordable place to call home. This is about working together. It's about partnerships. Yes, it is ambitious. Because it has to be. It's the only way we'll tackle the challenges we face as a nation. Debate adjourned. National Housing Supply and Affordability Council Bill 2023 477

National Housing Supply and Affordability Council Bill 2023

First Reading 477 Second Reading 478 09:13 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The National Housing Supply and Affordability Council Bill 2023 (bill) establishes the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council (council) as an independent statutory advisory body. The council will inform the Commonwealth's approach to housing policy by delivering independent advice to the government on housing supply and affordability. Establishment of the council was announced as part of the Safer and More Affordable Housing measure in the October 2022-23 budget. The bill forms part of the Housing Legislative Package, which delivers on key components of the government's ambitious election commitments on housing. Public consultation on the draft legislation attracted feedback from a broad range of stakeholders, including community housing providers, industry bodies, advocacy groups, research bodies, and state and territory organisations. The council will help the Commonwealth play a leadership role in improving housing supply and affordability. In addition to providing independent expert advice to government, the council will research and report on matters relating to housing supply and affordability. Both advice and reporting may be requested by the minister and the council will also have discretion to initiate its own research and reporting to the minister. As well as its reporting and general advisory role, the council will provide advice to the minister on the allocation of disbursements from the Housing Australia Future Fund. This advice will inform government consideration of disbursements as part of the annual budget process. To ensure the important work of the council could commence quickly, the government established an interim council from 1 January 2023. The interim council has six appointed members and one ex officio member, and operates as a non-statutory advisory body. Following passage of this bill and from 1 July 2023, the interim council will cease, and the council will commence operating as an independent statutory advisory body. The permanent council will consist of a minimum of six and a maximum of nine appointed members with skills and experience in a range of fields relating to housing supply and affordability. Increasing the potential number of appointed council members (compared with the interim council) responds to stakeholder feedback to ensure there is the right range of skills and experience on the council. The council will also include an ex officio member from the Commonwealth Treasury. The bill enshrines the independence of the council, ensuring it can provide full and frank advice and reporting on issues council members consider important across the housing spectrum. The requirements as to skills and expertise will support the production of high quality and targeted advice to the Commonwealth government. An important function of the council will be to work collaboratively with other Commonwealth bodies, state, territory and local governments, and other stakeholders, to support the collection and publication of nationally consistent data on housing supply and affordability. And this collaborative role will enable the council to provide important input into the development of the National Housing and Homelessness Plan, which will establish a clear national strategy to address the significant challenges we face to ensure that Australians have access to safer and more affordable housing. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Measures No. 1) Bill 2023 478

Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Measures No. 1) Bill 2023

First Reading 478 Second Reading 478 09:18 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Housing Measures No. 1) Bill 2023 forms part of the Housing Legislative Package, which delivers on the government's ambitious housing election commitments announced as part of the Safer and More Affordable Housing measure in the October 2022-23 budget. The government publicly consulted on the package from 19 December 2022 to 11 January 2023. Forty-six written submissions were received, and three consultation sessions held (two with state and territory officials, and one with community housing providers). This bill amends the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation Act 2018 (NHFIC Act) to rename NHFIC to Housing Australia. The NHFIC Act established NHFIC to improve housing outcomes for Australians and commenced operation on 30 June 2018. NHFIC's responsibilities include the operation of the Affordable Housing Bond Aggregator, capacity building for community housing providers, administering the government's Home Guarantee Schemes and the $1 billion National Housing Infrastructure Facility. The National Housing Infrastructure Facility was expanded in November 2022 to allow financing in support of social or affordable housing projects in addition to financing for underlying critical infrastructure projects. Housing Australia will continue to operate as a corporate Commonwealth entity governed by an independent board, reporting to the Minister for Housing. It will be directed in the performance of its functions by an investment mandate direction, issued by the Minister for Housing. In addition to the new responsibilities set out in the Housing Australia Future Fund Bill, Housing Australia will continue to administer the Affordable Housing Bond Aggregator, the National Housing Infrastructure Facility and the Home Guarantee Schemes. This will allow Housing Australia to build upon the NHFIC's successes whilst supporting the government to deliver on new key housing commitments. The bill also makes consequential amendments to reflect the change of the NHFIC to Housing Australia and ensure consistency across Commonwealth legislation. This bill also streamlines the functions of Housing Australia and establishes an annual review mechanism for the National Housing Infrastructure Facility. This will allow the government to regularly review the facility's performance against the objective of increasing and accelerating the supply of new social and affordable housing. The bill also extends the legislated Commonwealth guarantee, which underpins the NHFIC bonds that enable low-cost finance for community housing providers, until 30 June 2028. Extending the guarantee provides certainty to the community housing sector and investors in debt securities issued by the bond aggregator. Finally, the bill makes a number of further consequential amendments to legislation in the Finance and Treasury portfolios to enable the effective operation of the Housing Australia Future Fund. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. Debate adjourned. Higher Education Support Amendment (Australia's Economic Accelerator) Bill 2022 479

Higher Education Support Amendment (Australia's Economic Accelerator) Bill 2022

Report from Federation Chamber 479 Third Reading 479 09:22 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 479

Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading 479 09:23 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Improving integrity and good governance was a major election commitment of the Albanese Labor government. This was rightly one of the Australian people's top priorities at the last federal election, and, if I can say so, your appointment to your position, Mr Speaker, has helped us get back on track. I've spent quite some time in this place talking about the need after the last decade for us to rebuild the ethical infrastructure of our nation, and that is what we are getting onto. It's been obvious that this is required. It's been incredibly clear that our trajectory as a country has not been good enough in recent years. Our international reputation was, in the past, one of having robust institutions, the rule of law and integrity. But, particularly in the last decade, that has been backsliding against many metrics. So, this is not a partisan point. Let's hear what the different organisations have had to say. We've seen this backsliding in the past decade. Between 2012 and 2018 Australia slid to 13th place in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, which measures trust in government. A 2018 Australia Institute report calculated that perceptions of growing corruption in Australia shaved four per cent off our GDP because of the hit to business confidence. That had a real cost to us—a massive $72 billion. But over the past decade it got worse. Between 2018 and 2021 Australia dropped by five more slots to reach 18th place in the Corruption Perceptions Index. This picture is even more abysmal when you add it to the result of the 2022 Edelman Trust Barometer, which found that trust in government declined precipitously in 2021. I don't need to remind honourable members here of many of the reasons for that. The study found that politics had become viewed by Australians as a dividing force. Yesterday the member for Kennedy mentioned that he was once part of a fascist government that locked people up for protesting. Well, 61 per cent of Australians responding to the study I just mentioned reported in 2021 feeling unable to have civil debates about points they disagree with. As members know, the culture of this place is often seen as a bellwether of the broader social malaise of distrust. That is why there was such an urgent need for action when our government came to office. That is also why we quickly moved to implement our commitment to legislate a powerful, transparent and independent National Anti-Corruption Commission, the NACC Act, which passed both houses of parliament in November. Our government is also reforming whistleblower protection through the Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022. This is all part of our commitment to the Australian people to restore trust and integrity to government. Today we continue to consider a piece of legislation to increase transparency that many of us never thought we would need. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 that is before us will implement reforms that foster greater transparency and accountability in our system of government. This bill responds to the revelations that Australians learned about in August last year that their former Prime Minister, the member for Cook, had secretly sworn himself into five extra portfolios that were already occupied by his own ministers in 2020 and 2021, so that in addition to being appointed to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet the former Prime Minister was invested with the power to administer the departments of: health; finance; industry, science, energy and resources; the Treasury; and home affairs. The news of these secret appointments shocked many Australians and also shocked many around the world. It goes without saying that it also shocked many members on all sides of this parliament when it came to light, except for a select few in the former Prime Minister's circle. This was an issue that truly cut across political lines. Of these multiple portfolios, former Prime Minister John Howard said: I don't think he should have done that, I don't think there was any need to do it, and I wouldn't have. The next coalition Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, said: I'm just not going to defend what was done … it is just highly unconventional, highly unorthodox, and shouldn't have happened. The next coalition PM, Malcolm Turnbull, said: This is sinister stuff. This is secret government. And: This is one of the most appalling things I have ever heard in our federal government. I mean, the idea that a prime minister would be sworn into other ministries, secretly, is incredible. It was in this context of widespread and bipartisan shock that the government acted to prevent this ever happening again. Our government referred these matters to the Solicitor-General, Dr Stephen Donaghue KC. As was clear from his advice, 'the principles of responsible government are fundamentally undermined by the actions of the former government.' And many who still sit on the benches opposite us today were part of the government that allowed this culture, this behaviour, to happen. In his advice, the Solicitor-General noted: The Governor-General has no discretion to refuse to accept the Prime Minister's advice in relation to such an appointment. But, while the Solicitor-General advised that Prime Minister Scott Morrison, the member for Cook, had acted lawfully and in accordance with the Constitution, he did so only because the current rules did not require notification of such an appointment to be valid. That's obviously an omission that, we learned, can be misused to undermine transparency in federal parliament, at the very least, and to accumulate power in too few hands, at the worst. Following the Solicitor-General's advice, it was also clear that an appropriate and swift inquiry was needed, so, on 26 August last year, the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General announced the appointment of former High Court Justice the Hon. Virginia Bell AC to lead the Inquiry into the Appointment of the Former Prime Minister to Administer Multiple Departments. The report was provided to our government on 25 November last year and has been published online. This is an outstanding, incisive report that goes to the core of this unfortunate story in vivid detail. Thanks to the report, we know, for example, that Mr Frydenberg, the then Treasurer, was not informed of the then Prime Minister's appointment to administer the Department of the Treasury. The report draws on firsthand interviews with parliamentarians and officials involved in this case. This inquiry was not about the politics but about how this happened, why it happened and who knew about it. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 forms one part, an important part, of our government's response to Ms Bell's recommendations. In response, the bill will require the Official Secretary to the Governor-General to publish a notifiable instrument, registered on the Federal Register of Legislation as soon as reasonably practicable, that the Governor-General has chosen, summoned and sworn an executive councillor to the Federal Executive Council, appointed an officer to administer a department of state or directed a minister of state to hold an office. It will also require notification when any of these positions are revoked. The notifiable instrument will include the name of the person, so we understand who is being sworn, the department of state and the date on which they were sworn, appointed or directed. In the case of revocations, the notifiable instrument must include the name of the person, the name of the former office and the date that such membership, appointment or direction was revoked. This bill demonstrates the government's readiness to act promptly to restore the Australian people's confidence in our federal system of government and to rebuild integrity in public sector institutions, processes and officials. Transparency in government processes is not a 'nice to have'; it is essential, because our system of parliamentary democracy relies on conventions and checks and balances. As the Solicitor-General concluded: … it is impossible for the parliament to hold ministers to account for the administration of departments if it does not know which ministers are responsible for which departments. It's pretty simple stuff: we need to know who is responsible for the discharge of what responsibilities. The measures in this bill will go some way towards providing greater integrity and transparency around the process of appointing elected officials to high office, especially towards ensuring we have a system of government where one person cannot again garner powers without adequate accountability to the Australian people and the Australian parliament. It will ensure the Australian people are able to access information relating to the composition of the Federal Executive Council, those appointed to administer certain departments of state and the high offices that ministers of state hold. This is a technical change, an important change with positive and long-term implications for our democracy. Like the American experiment, the Australian project relies for its legitimacy, in the eyes of the people, on a raft of rules, principles and conventions that are not necessarily laws. In this case, the convention was that the members of the executive could not legitimately accrue more power without their own parliamentary colleagues and, of course, the public knowing about it. Our system of government had until now assumed this norm to be widely understood and to not need any specific act of parliament to enshrine it in law. Unfortunately, through the actions of the former Prime Minister and his inner circle who were aware of this, we have learned that we can no longer assume anything. I wish there had been no need for this bill—obviously, everyone does—but there clearly is a need, so I commend this bill to the House and welcome this reform that will strengthen transparency and good governance, no matter the government of the day. Crucially, this bill will also help to restore citizens' trust in government from the dangerously low levels we have seen. Earlier in my contribution I went through that slide in trust in government that we've seen in the last decade. This bill will contribute to making our democracy stronger by shedding light on ministerial and other high-level appointments. In a mature democracy like ours, this shouldn't be optional; it should be law. This bill makes sure that it is law, and it joins with our other measures to start rebuilding the ethical infrastructure of our great nation. That's what the Australian people expect of all of us, so I call on all sides of government—all parties, all Independents—to support this bill. 09:37 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley Imagine, if you will, being the Prime Minister of Australia in early 2020. As the Prime Minister, you had recently won a hard-fought election—so hard-fought that even your own description of that win was that it was a miracle. You are part of a party that, over the last 20 years of Australian federal democracy, had been in power, with its coalition partner, for some 13 years. But over those last two decades, public trust in government had fallen alarmingly. In fact, by December 2019, not all that long after the miracle election win, trust in government had fallen to its lowest level on record in Australia, with one in four Australians telling the ANU Australian Election Study that they had lost confidence in political leaders and institutions. That same study found that Australians' satisfaction with democracy was only just higher than that recorded in 1979, just a few years after the one and only constitutional crisis that we'd ever had in this country. In fact, satisfaction with how democracy was working in December of 2019 was at 59 per cent, having fallen from 87 per cent in 2007. You're the Prime Minister at a time when Professor McAllister from the ANU, conducting the Australian Election Study, said: … the findings were a clear warning the nation's politicians needed to do better in their efforts to represent and win the confidence of everyday Australians. That's the context in which you're the Prime Minister in early 2020. You've just perhaps started to recover from the public outrage over the fact that you were overseas on holiday while vast tracts of the country were burning, and now you're faced with a global health crisis and no-one really knows how that will play out, apart from seriously frightening and dire predictions—some of which are already manifesting—of previously unimaginable levels of death not just around the globe in other countries but here in our country. And you know, as do other leaders in this country, that we're going to have to take unprecedented steps to deal with this international health crisis, this global pandemic. You don't necessarily know what they all are, but it's clear that serious, unprecedented steps are going to have to be taken: actions that, on anyone's account, will absolutely require citizens to have confidence and faith in their governments to support the people and the governments that will necessarily be implementing restrictions on their lives that they never imagined they were going to have to face. We know that the power of government relies on the citizens supporting the democratic system that gives government power to do the everyday mundane things, let alone the extraordinary things that are required in a time of crisis. But then you're the Prime Minister who discovers that you, personally, don't actually have the legislative power to exercise some of those extraordinary powers—it's the health minister who does. So what do you do in all of those circumstances? Imagine that you are that person with the crisis in confidence, the global health crisis, the clear need to make sure that Australians understand what is happening and trust that the measures that are going to be put in place are being put in place for the best reasons—to protect them, their families and their communities—and one of the most senior and experienced people in your cabinet has the legislative power to put in place some of those measures. As a reasonable, rational person who is in politics and government in order to make life better for Australian citizens, what do you do in those circumstances? What would you do where a crisis of trust in government was about to intersect with a crisis of life and livelihood, which at that time, in March of 2020, also had the potential to wreak havoc on the systems and the way of life that we all value? We know what the Prime Minister at the time did. He secretly assumed the powers of the health minister and thought that the best way to take the Australian people with him was to not tell them what he was doing; it was to take an extraordinary step that no Prime Minister had ever taken before of giving himself powers—extraordinary powers—but not tell anyone that he had done it. Is that what you would have done if you were the person responsible at that time? Would you want to go down in history as giving powers to yourself in secret? Would you want to be compared to Trump and others around the globe who took power for the sake of power, not power for the sake of delivering for other people? Or would you perhaps have said to the Australian people in this extraordinary time: 'Extraordinary measures will need to be taken. Standing next to me is the minister with the powers to do it, and you can absolutely be assured that, as Prime Minister, I will be in the room at all times when decisions are made'? I don't know about anyone else—well, I know about one person, because he didn't take this path—but I think that's how you start to rebuild trust in democracy and institutions in this country. You are transparent, you are honest, you execute the powers that are given to you by legislation and the Constitution. And, if you have to do something that has never been done in the history of our democracy before, you tell the Australian people what you are doing and why you are doing. Is it any wonder that by December 2019 a vast number of Australians didn't think that their government governed for them? As it turned out, they didn't even know what their Prime Minister was doing. But other cabinet members knew about that decision to take on the health minister's power. Whilst much of the discussion and debate about the then Prime Minister's secret power grab of—how many portfolios?—five different portfolios is focused on the Prime Minister, let's not forget that the first transfer or adoption of power in relation to the health minister was kept secret from the Australian people and from this parliament but not from other members of that cabinet. There was more than one person who thought it was a good idea to keep secrets from the Australian people when they were governing, and governing in a crisis. Are they the sort of members of this parliament that anyone wants to see back in charge of the levers of power if that's how they thought they should be exercised? The clear answer to that from the Australian people at the last federal election was no, without even knowing about one of the most inexplicable actions that a Prime Minister has ever taken, and that even he has not been able to explain in any coherent way at any time to his colleagues, let alone the Australian people. We are now seeing the consequence playing out in New South Wales, with court cases having to be taken because decisions were made exercising secret powers that the Australian people and the minister responsible didn't even know about. It's worse than that, actually. The Australian people were told those powers were exercised under prime ministerial authority, when they weren't. This piece of legislation, which surely no-one ever contemplated should be needed in this country, goes towards dealing with that embarrassing undermining of democracy episode in Australia's history. I personally think it's inconceivable that it could ever happen again, even without this legislation. Surely we couldn't have another prime minister or another cabinet willing to accept this sort of behaviour, but this piece of legislation will ensure it—because honestly we didn't imagine it would happen in the first place, so who knows what they would do if they ever got their hands on the levers of power again. The crisis in democracy can be dealt with. In fact during COVID we saw, for a brief period of time, Australians starting to believe in democracy and in their leaders again because they did see, publicly, difficult decisions being made in order to save lives, in order to save businesses and in order to save the economy. But it can't be restored unless everyone in this chamber, everyone involved in politics and everyone who cares about democracy, parliament and government are equally committed to restoring it. I'm proud, as is everyone on this side of the chamber, to be part of a government that went to an election saying that integrity has to be restored and we want to be the government that does the hard work to start to do that. As my colleague the member for Solomon said before me, and I'm sure others have said in this debate, we are proud of this legislation, along with the National Anti-Corruption Commission—the way in which this government is putting in place proper guidelines for how funding should be delivered to organisations, the commitment to a code of conduct, the commitment to conducting ourselves as professional adults whose every action and decision is about making lives better for the people we represent—and we are committed to that. I commend this bill, and I ask everyone to imagine what they would have done in March 2020. If you come to the conclusion that it couldn't have been what the then Prime Minister did, admit that publicly, because there are too many people in this chamber who still want to be apologetic for Trumpish behaviour that has no place in Australia's democracy. 09:52 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong I thank the Member for Dunkley for her wise words in support of this very important legislation, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022. There've been many seminal moments and historical moments in the short history of our democracy and federation. There are moments that we reflect on and go: where was I when? 'Where was I during the moon landing?' is something you often hear people chat about. Where was I when Cathy Freeman won gold in the 400 metres? Where was I on the date of the dismissal? Now, in 2023, we reflect: where was I when I found out the former Prime Minister and member for Cook swore himself into five secret ministries? Where was I when I found out about the deep betrayal by our former Prime Minister? As I was writing this speech, I thought I would take myself back to that time and just think about everyone's shock and disbelief at reading this news. I remember that day in August last year. My phone was going off with messages from everywhere. I recall one I sent to my partner, Jo, which was just a link to the breaking news, and all I typed was, 'OMG WTF!' It was a truly extraordinary moment. OMG WTF, indeed. As we speak on this legislation, I thought it would be useful to understand the history of this extraordinary moment. We need to remember and refresh our memories about this absolute betrayal by the member for Cook of parliamentary process and of our democracy. He further severed the trust he held with the Australian people, and here's how it played out. In August last year the current Prime Minister confirmed that, between March 2020 and May 2021, the member for Cook appointed himself to administer the Department of Health on 14 March 2020, as Minister for Finance on 30 March 2020, as Minister for Industry, Science, Energy and Resources on 15 April 2021, as Minister for Home Affairs on 6 May 2021 and as Treasurer on 6 May 2021. This revelation came just hours after the member for Cook said that he didn't recall whether he had been sworn into ministries other than Health and Finance. Imagine that! Imagine not recalling whether you were appointed a minister! He went on the radio nationwide and said, 'I don't recall being appointed.' Extraordinary! Anyway, let's go through each one, because it's important, as we try to fix the mistakes of the past, that we understand what happened and when. On 14 March 2020, the member for Cook appointed himself to the Department of Health, as Minister for Health. At the time Australia had recorded just 100 cases of COVID. Five days later Australia would close its borders to international travellers, and returning Australians would thereafter be ordered into hotel quarantine. In what we learned to be a rare exception, the member for Cook had the support of the then health minister, Greg Hunt, to appoint himself to the portfolio; we know that's an exception to the other portfolios he appointed himself to. It's believed it had been discussed with other members of the national security cabinet, and we learned also that the reasoning for it was it was a safeguard mechanism should Mr Hunt become ill or infected. This one is half understandable—totally not necessary because we know that current processes mean if a minister is unavailable we can appoint a new one quite quickly, so it was not needed. But, sure, a few people talked about it, it seemed okay, and those in the know knew. But what's not understandable and not okay is that neither the public nor the parliament were informed of the member for Cook's secret appointment. That's not okay, and that didn't happen. Then, on 30 March 2020, the member for Cook appointed himself to the Finance portfolio. On that same day he announced the JobKeeper scheme, which provided a $1,500 fortnightly payment to about six million Australians. The member for Cook said last year of this appointment, 'The situation was unprecedented and extraordinary', and that he needed a backup plan. I'll tell you what was unprecedented and extraordinary: the fact that then finance minister—the real one, not the substitute—Mathias Cormann did not know that the member for Cook had appointed himself to the Finance portfolio. Once again the public and the parliament were not informed. Interestingly, the member for Cook said at the time that not informing the real Minister for Finance that he had appointed himself to the same portfolio had been an oversight of his office—not an oversight of his, but of his office. There's always someone else to blame, for the member for Cook; nothing's his fault. And there was no apology to the parliament or to the Australian people for not informing them. It was just an oversight of his office not to inform the actual finance minister. On 15 April 2021, over a year later, the member for Cook appointed himself to the portfolios of Industry, Science and Resources. The member for Hinkler, who was the resources minister at the time, said he had a conversation at the time with the member for Cook. But neither of them made those conversations public; again, the parliament and the public were not informed that the member for Cook had also acted in that portfolio. And we now know, as the member for Dunkley just outlined, the absolute mess that that has left communities in up and down the New South Wales coast, through that court case—something that is a real consequence of these terrible decisions of the member for Cook. Again, the public and the parliament were not made aware. On 6 May the member for Cook—starting to get used to the process—instead of appointing himself to one extra portfolio in one day appointed himself to two extra portfolios. He appointed himself as Treasurer and as the Minister for Home Affairs. He was getting more efficient, the more he did it, you see. But he didn't tell the public, didn't tell the parliament, didn't tell the Treasurer and didn't tell the member for McPherson that he'd appointed himself to these portfolios. There's no doubt that the actions of the member for Cook were unprecedented and extraordinary. It's now a responsibility of this government, which was elected on a platform of integrity, to fix this issue and ensure that it never occurs again. The Australian people elected us to restore and rebuild trust in this place and in politics generally. That's why this Ministers of State Amendment Bill is so important. This bill will ensure that the Australian people have transparency and accountability in their government. They will never have to find out that such a terrible misuse of office has occurred and they will be able to access such information related to the composition of the federal executive—those appointed to administer certain departments of state and the highest offices that ministers of state hold. What the former Prime Minister did isn't just unconventional, isn't just unorthodox; it is and was a violation of the conventions of this place. And it is indefensible, as we learnt from those within his own party, some of whom are still here today—senior members of his own party who also thought these actions were indefensible. The former member for my own seat of Bennelong, former Prime Minister John Howard, stated that he didn't think the member for Cook should have done what he did, that there was no need to do it and that he would not have done it. Of course he would never have done it! There's no-one in the history of this place who would ever think to do this, other than someone of the calibre of the member for Cook. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said: This is sinister stuff. This is secret government. I think this is one of the most appalling things I have ever heard in our federal government. I mean, the idea that a Prime Minister would be sworn in to other ministries, secretly, is incredible. Upon finding out that the former Prime Minister had sworn himself into her portfolio, the member for McPherson told the media: This is totally unacceptable, for a prime minister to behave in this manner undermines everything that a federal government constitutionally should stand for. She would then ask him to resign and to leave parliament—something that I note he is yet to do. This government needs to ensure that what the member for Cook did can never happen again, as we embark on what the Australian people elected us to do, and that is to rebuild the trust of Australian people in government. We now come to what the member for Cook had to say for himself. He said he was trying to improve efficiency of government. But this was nothing more than the member for Cook trying to accumulate more power for himself. In the mind of the member for Cook, he did nothing wrong in awarding himself these five secret ministries. He believes he was justified in his behaviour, and he's made that clear in his inconsistent comments and answers. We all sat here listening to the member for Cook's defence during the censure motion. He still doesn't get it. He tried to justify his actions under the guise of the unprecedented circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic. Well, if this were to be believed, it might—might—explain being sworn into the first two of his secret ministries. It doesn't explain why no-one was told, but it might explain that. But then why did he appoint himself to three other ministries more than a year later? So, that reason doesn't stack up. The inconsistencies continue. He said he had trust in his former ministers and that he trusted them to exercise the powers of their portfolio. But he only took on portfolios in which those same ministers had unilateral power to make decisions without cabinet. They're the ones the member for Cook appointed himself to. And they continue again. He said that the suggestions of co-administrations of departments is 100 per cent false. Why, then, does official documentation show that the member for Cook was appointed to administer the departments of home affairs and the Treasury? This is the same man—the member for Cook—who stood in front of a Perth audience last year and said that we shouldn't trust governments. I don't think we should have trusted his government, and this government is set to restore some of the trust that the member for Cook's government eroded. Does the opposition take this matter seriously? During the censure motion, they voted against it, which is something I found incredibly surprising. But even more galling was the line of members of the opposition going to congratulate Mr Morrison for that half-hour defence of these indefensible actions. I found that extraordinary. With the exception of one or two members of the opposition, they stood by what the member for Cook did and then congratulated him after his speech. I have some advice for those opposite: keeping those in this place accountable for their actions is not a witch-hunt; establishing trust in our great democratic system is not a witch-hunt. The people of Australia made their decision loudly and clearly in May as to who in government they trusted to restore integrity, and it wasn't the opposition—for good reason. This legislation is just one part of the Albanese government's commitment to respond to Justice Bell's Inquiry into the Appointment of the Former Prime Minister to Administer Multiple Departments. This legislation is just one part of our commitment to the Australian people to safeguard our democracy and to ensure that the people of Australia can stand proud in their trust in this place. We understand that democracy is precious, and we understand that when it is challenged, as it was by the member for Cook, it needs to be defended. We know that we must restore trust in and integrity to politics, and this bill, in the timely manner in which it has come to this place, shows our commitment to achieving just that. This bill, if passed through this place, will ensure that never again will one person be able to hold such extraordinary ministerial power without accountability to the Australian people and to this parliament. I commend the bill. 10:07 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur This bill is very important. It's very important not only to the Australian public and our democracy; it is also important in restoring trust and pride in the way that governments behave and execute their responsibilities. I thank the member for Bennelong and, before him, the member for Dunkley and the member for Solomon for their very pertinent remarks about this bill and its need to assure the Australian people that what happened under the previous Prime Minister could never happen again. I thank the Attorney-General and the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister for introducing and advocating this bill, which I'm proud to support. Again, it's part of the Albanese government restoring faith to the Australian people in our system of government and in the way in which we govern. It's a combination of a number of measures that will prevent the actions that the previous Prime Minister, the member for Cook, took in assuming responsibility for multiple portfolios in the previous government. The actions of the former Prime Minister, the member for Cook, have been widely documented, and rightly so; however, they only came to light many, many months after the fact, and only once there had been a change in government and some light had been shed on his behaviour. I'm not so sure that anything has changed in the coalition. Of course, they voted against the censure motion. They have not demonstrated any real change in philosophy and, as much as anything else, they seem to be in shock that we feel the behaviour was wrong. It was a shock. It was a shock to all Australians: to members of parliament, to constituents and even to the many ministers that the former Prime Minister had taken portfolios from or whose portfolios he had assumed responsibility for. Yet, during it all, the then Prime Minister, the member for Cook, continued to doggedly deny any opportunity for a federal Anti-Corruption Commission, and now I think we know why. Transparency and accountability were not something that he believed in or encouraged. Thankfully, the Albanese government does not stand by or support such behaviour. We're getting on with the job of establishing a National Anti-Corruption Commission, and the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 also exemplifies this. Australia has a robust democracy that depends on transparency. It is important that every citizen feels that they are part of the government and can actually interact with the government about matters that are important to them. Our philosophy is that the Australian people have the right to choose their government and their representatives and a right to see how the government functions and how their representatives do truly represent their views. Sadly, this incident with the former Prime Minister shows how vulnerable this philosophy can be when the wrong people do the wrong things with little or no accountability. The former Prime Minister, of course, has said here in this parliament that, if he'd been asked by a journalist, by a colleague or even by a constituent about his secret portfolios, he would have told them the truth. He said that in retrospect. He even, when questioned, of course, said he couldn't remember some of the portfolios or when he assumed responsibility for them. With respect to the former Prime Minister, even the most forgiving people do not believe that. We saw, over a decade of coalition government, an erosion of transparency and accountability. I think this is a philosophical issue and a philosophical problem within the coalition. We see that in their very behaviour. We see that in their continual refusal to have a representative party that represents all Australians. They deny women positions of power. They deny, for example, the most disadvantaged the rights of ordinary citizens, and we are seeing that evolve in the robodebt scandal. And it is a scandal. We saw no ministers in the previous government stand up and admit what was very, very wrong with a system that targeted the most vulnerable and the most disadvantaged in our community. Then, when publicly questioned about it, they leaked information about the most vulnerable people to right-wing journalists to try and punish the people who were complaining about a system that was manifestly unfair. There has been no action from the coalition on this. The robodebt royal commission is still evolving, and I am sure there will be more things that we will find out about it, but we know the philosophy of the coalition involved secret consultations that punished the most vulnerable and didn't allow people to see what was happening to the most vulnerable in our society. We see the total lack of responsibility shown for these people by the previous government. There has been a decade of former prime ministers, including the member for Wentworth, the member for Warringah et cetera, where manipulations, secret funding arrangements et cetera were foisted upon the Australian public in a very, very unfair manner. The action of the former Prime Minister to secretly appoint himself to multiple ministries, with the collusion of the Governor-General him, without informing the Australian people is very sinister, but it is also just a symptom of the secretive philosophy of punishing the vulnerable and of not allowing the Australian public to see the truth. It was a philosophy that continued for 10 years under the coalition government. As I said, I'm not convinced that anything has changed. The actions of the former Prime Minister and his government were contrary to the spirit of an open democracy. They should never be repeated, and this legislation is part of the remedy for that. It's not just Labor politicians who are saying that; previous prime ministers have said it. The previous member for Bennelong John Howard was critical of the former Prime Minister's action, as was the former member for Wentworth Malcolm Turnbull et cetera. It was a symptom of a government that did not respect the democracy that we all cherish. I think those opposite are paying the price for it now and will continue to pay the price for some time. The advice of the Solicitor-General, Steven Donaghue KC, who was tasked by our government to review the former Prime Minister's actions was that 'the principles of responsible government are fundamentally undermined' by the actions of the former government. I agree with him. Our democracy depends on a form of government that allows every citizen to feel involved and see how it works. The fact that this very building and this chamber allow the public to look at our debates, to view their representatives and to see how we debate different issues is in this spirit, and long may it continue so. The fact that our constituents can visit us in our office and question us about policy, our behaviour and how we represent their wishes is part of that open democracy. I am not convinced that the coalition understands that even now. That is why this bill is so important. It will implement reforms to provide greater transparency and accountability at the Commonwealth level of government. It will stop things like the rorting of sports grants and the rorting of grants intended for flood relief et cetera during previous natural disasters. It will stop that rorting. The previous coalition government saw nothing wrong with that rorting. Their behaviour was absolutely shameful, and it is only now being exposed. But I don't hear anyone from the coalition apologising for that behaviour. That behaviour is a fundamental undermining of our whole system of government. We've heard in New South Wales that the philosophy of the Liberal and National parties is that rorting is okay. We heard from the previous leader of the Liberal Party in New South Wales that rorting is okay: 'Everyone does it. We call it pork-barrelling, but it's actually okay. Don't worry about it.' How do you think people who are the victims of natural disasters or who have been left out of grants because they happened to live in Labor electorates feel about that? This is a fundamental issue, and I believe that the coalition will never recover from their last election loss until they actually understand that. The robodebt royal commission is very important. The findings are shocking even to me, who was expecting some bad things to be found out. It's even worse than I imagined, and I think those opposite should be absolutely ashamed of that. I hope that at some stage they will apologise for their behaviour. Over many years we have seen from the coalition contempt for transparency and appropriate behaviour, and it was seen in many representatives from the previous government. It's not just the Prime Minister. Whilst he may have been head of the government and encouraged that philosophy of rorting, opaqueness and lack of honesty, many ministers in the previous government shared that behaviour. Whether it be the sports rorts, the carpark rorts or robodebt, they were carried out by the previous government and the previous ministers under the Prime Minister. They were not done in the best interest of Australian democracy. In my own interest in health care, I do think some of the actions of the previous government at the beginning of the pandemic were great and brave. The closing of the borders, the restrictions on movement, et cetera, were very important in stopping the spread of COVID-19 and they were very brave. But subsequent actions really have confirmed to me that the previous government was a government that was not acting in the best interest of the Australian people. Just imagine if the previous Prime Minister had installed himself as health minister. Imagine what damage he could have done if he wanted to enforce other, more Draconian measures like some governments overseas had done. He could have done that, overruling the health minister. It's only now that we realise that. Imagine what he could have done on border security, having taken over responsibility for home affairs. Imagine what damage the previous Prime Minister could have done. Whilst this may seem theoretical, it is very important that we do secure our democracy for the future. We can do that, and this bill is part of it. I congratulate the government for bringing this bill to the House. I think that, though there is a greater philosophy involved, and I hope those in the coalition will eventually understand that, to me, the actions of the previous Prime Minister and his government are shocking. Time is making it look worse and worse as we discover more things, particularly with the robodebt disaster. I know many of my constituents contacted me about it, devastated by being incorrectly being given large bills to pay back to the government. The Albanese Labor government is a more compassionate and a much better and open government. I commend this bill to the House as a way of reinforcing that. Debate adjourned. Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Improvements for Families and Gender Equality) Bill 2022 487

Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Improvements for Families and Gender Equality) Bill 2022

Second Reading 487 10:23 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan One of the biggest considerations I took before I put my hand up and decided to run for the seat of Swan was whether I could do the job to the highest standard whilst being there for my two young children. It's a hard decision to make, and one that many, particularly Western Australian candidates, consider during their nomination progress. It's something we all think about when we have children. We ask ourselves questions like: how can we balance our careers and our incomes and remain present in the lives of our children? This is why I rise today to speak in favour of this bill on behalf of parents and carers and future parents and carers in my electorate. I believe that parents shouldn't forgo their careers just to be present in their child's early years. I took paid parental leave when I had my children. I took it at that time so I could be there for Lincoln for that important period. At four months old, Lincoln was still breastfeeding, and he certainly wasn't walking and talking. But the economic and career realities that working parents face meant that I would later return to work. This is something that hangs heavily on the minds of lead parents when they make the decision to return to work. The truth is that some parents don't return to work and instead stay at home, often at the expense of their careers. Typically, it's often mothers and female carers who make the decision to leave their job, foregoing income, superannuation and career experience. This is one of the reasons why the pay gap exists. This issue is a cost that deprives our nation of talent. It means that women, on average, are retiring with less superannuation; it means that women, on average, are earning less than their male counterparts in the same career. It's also the reason why we see that some women miss out on promotions. Parenting is not the sole responsibility of the mother. This bill recognises this fact. This bill gives families access to payment, gives parents more flexibility in how they'll take leave and encourages parents to share improved gender equality. My husband and I use the term 'lead parenting'. This is because you can change who is looking after the children, but it's not a thing that needs to be consistent. On some days, like today, Sam's in charge of parental responsibilities as I focus on my work; on other days, it's his. No-one should feel that they have to be defined as the primary or the secondary carrier in order to receive paid parental leave. In a child's eye, there isn't really a primary or a secondary carer; it's mum or dad, or maybe only mum or only dad, or maybe mum and mum or dad and dad. It's useful to point out that the first version of this bill was rather heteronormative. Modern families look different, including the families of Swan, which reminds me of a fabulous gay couple in the electorate of Swan, Lana Snook and former Olympic gold medallist Toni Cronk. They're people who have shown the different models that exist, and that's something that this bill recognises. I don't want to look at this bill only from the perspective of lead parents and women getting greater flexibility; I also want to look at it from the perspective of providing fathers and male carers greater choice to be in their children's lives and balance their careers. Kids love having their dads around. Last year, I met with the Fathering Project, which is doing great work empowering dads to be the best parents they can be. We spoke about how their work found that some of the children whose dads were male MPs felt like they were a second priority. Absent and busy fathers are a significant social issue, and it inadvertently affects the lives of Australian children and young people. Whether it's people or blokes working FIFO, long hours in the office or sitting in this chamber, economic and gender based expectations of men sometimes prevents them from being as present as they would like to be in their children's lives. Giving fathers and male carers a chance to be there for the first moments of their child's life allows for that bond to be built. That's something that has a lasting effect and is important, particularly in the earlier years. The early years are known as some of the most formative years in a child's life. It's often said that it's the first 900 days that's really critical for a child, and for both parents to be present is really important. When dads are involved in a child's early years, it sets them up to have a successful relationship for the rest of their childhood and teenage years. It's also something that helps them to be well-adjusted adults. There's something particularly warming and historic about standing in this chamber and talking about parental leave in relation to making it more accessible for male parents. I want to point out that it was the Labor Party that introduced this in the first instance. It's also the Labor Party that's improving this policy. One of the reasons for that is that the Labor Party has a better representation of what Australian society looks like. The Labor Party is so diverse on this side of the chamber, and that relates not only to women but also to men who are very present in the lives of their children. I see that this bill is a structural change that will ensure dads will be more present. I'm very lucky, in my family, that my children's grandfather is very hands-on and very present. The thing I can see, because my husband, Sam, has had the opportunity to be at home during their earlier years, is that my children have a strong bond with their father, and that is something that they will have for the rest of their lives. This bill will ensure that more fathers will be there. I also want to talk about the flexibility of this bill in the way that it's taken. I remember being in my electorate of Swan, at the pool, speaking to a mother there called Louise, who was pregnant and talking about her baby that was going to be born. She was very excited to hear about this bill. The thing that she particularly liked was the flexibility about which parent actually takes this leave. She said that for her first child's birth, they didn't have as much flexibility, and from a family circumstance perspective it was harder to make sure that they realised the full benefits, so this was something that she was very excited about. We also talked about our cheaper childcare bill and how that would be helpful when she returned to work. The Labor Party is very supportive of women, and this bill does that. We want to make sure that dads are present, and that we have an understanding of what modern families look like—they're not always heterosexual couples. This is a wonderful time for children and their parents. The truth is that the Labor Party has always been at the forefront of this. In WA, Senator Pat Giles was a woman who had worked negotiating union agreements to make sure that people had access to maternity leave, which was, initially, one year of leave without pay, to make sure that women were guaranteed their jobs. They were legislative things that happened in the 1980s. That was almost 50 years ago. The truth is that we as a society are continuing to improve what we're doing. We are continuing to make sure that we think about the future and make sure that children, like the children we see up there in the gallery, have mums and dads and lead parents that are present in their lives. 10:32 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond Can I start by acknowledging the contribution from the member for Swan. That was absolutely outstanding. You are making an incredible difference here in this parliament, and I acknowledge, particularly, your pride about this bill. I think we all share your pride in the historic nature of the bill. I, too, am very proud to speak on the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Improvements for Families and Gender Equality) Bill 2022. This bill implements the first tranche of the government's paid parental leave changes that were announced in the budget. It's a bill we are incredibly proud of because paid parental leave is an issue that has such importance to the Albanese Labor government. The bill is a response to the many community concerns expressed over a long period of time and to the many advocates for having policies like this in the place. It was part of the centrepiece of our first budget because we understand how important this issue is. I am very, very proud to be a part of a government that recognises the value of a policy that is not only good for women but is good for men, good for families and really good for the economy. I am very proud to be a part of a Labor government that has always recognised this and has seen the value of paid parental leave and providing that assistance. We saw its value from the very first introduction of similar policies such as the maternity allowance, which was introduced in 1912 by the Fisher Labor government, reintroduced in 1943 by the Curtin Labor government and introduced again, in 1996, by the Keating Labor government. Then there was the Paid Parental Leave Act 2010, introduced by the Gillard Labor government. For those of us here it was indeed a very proud moment to have that introduced, because it was an issue that the community had raised on so many occasions. Here we are now today in 2023 with the introduction of the Paid Parental Leave Amendment Bill by the Albanese Labor government. This bill really does signify the most significant step to improve the scheme since its establishment in 2011. Our policies may have evolved over time, but history paints a very, very clear picture. It is Labor governments who have always been on the side of Australian families and who have provided policies like this which increase participation and also are beneficial to our economy. Indeed, with this bill today we very proudly continue that tradition. The bill reflects the government's commitment to improving the lives of working families, supporting better outcomes for children and, very importantly, advancing women's economic equality. Around 181,000 families will benefit from the changes in this bill, including around 4,300 parents who will gain access—who would have been ineligible under the current scheme—so it certainly opens it up so much more. And with this critical reform, the government is implementing paid parental leave conditions that reflect the needs of modern families, as we have heard from many speakers here today. We are reflecting those needs of contemporary families and their wishes in terms of accessing that leave. From July 2023 the bill delivers six very important key changes. Firstly, it combines the two existing payments into a single 20-week scheme. Secondly, it reserves a portion of the scheme for each parent to support them both to take time off work after the birth or adoption. Thirdly, it makes it easier for both parents to access the payment by removing the notion of primary and secondary carers. It's so important to do that for parents who, of course, are equally contributing to their children's upbringing. Fourthly, it expands access by introducing a $350,000 family income test, under which people can qualify if they don't actually meet the $156,647 individual income test. Fifthly, it increases flexibility for parents to choose how they take paid parental leave days and transition back to work—giving them that important choice. Sixthly, it allows eligible fathers and partners to access the payment irrespective of whether the mother or birth parent meets the income test or residency requirements. The bill's changes to the threshold limit are very important. We know that, under the current scheme, when a birth mother earns under the $151,350 per year threshold and a partner earns more, the mother can access paid parental leave. However, if the mother earns more than the threshold and her partner less, the partner is not able to access the paid parental leave scheme. Clearly, that's not a good situation. Between the 2010 and 2017 financial years, the number of women with taxable incomes of more than $150,000 has more than doubled. Indeed, in my own electorate of Richmond, since the 2011 census to the most recent 2021 census, there has been a more than 350 per cent increase in the number of women earning more than $150,000—a huge increase in that time. So it's clear that the current scheme had to be changed and it needed reform to adapt to this growing trend. We've recognised this shift, and so this bill will introduce a much-needed family income limit of $350,000, operating alongside the current individual limit. With these changes, a difference in earnings according to something like gender will not wrongly limit a couple's access to financial support. We need to look at a couple as a unit, working together, earning together for the betterment of their family, and that's exactly what this bill does. We need to have added flexibility. We know that over the last few years, particularly through the pandemic and all of its challenges, we've heard so many Australians talk about the need for flexibility in their everyday lives. We recognise this, and with this bill we are ensuring that paid parental leave is flexible to reflect those modern needs. The new scheme allows claimants to take the payment in multiple blocks as small as a day at a time within two years of the birth or adoption, and it removes the requirement to not return to work in order to be eligible. Very importantly too, it removes the notion of primary and secondary carers. It's really important to do that because it allows all eligible parents to claim the payment. This indeed reflects the needs and reality of our modern society and the shift in community attitudes. It really is indicative of this government and how much we understand the needs of Australian families today. We reflect that in this House, which we should be doing as a representation of the people. With the move to a single 20-week scheme, this bill allows fathers and partners to access the government payment at the same time as their employer leave. Under the current scheme, this is available to mothers; however, fathers are required to be on unpaid leave in order to receive the payment. Fixing this inequality removes the financial disincentive for fathers and partners to access the scheme and take time off work to care for a child. Whether you are a mother or a father caring for your child, gender should absolutely not affect your access to parental leave payments. This is one of so many measures that this government has very proudly brought in, particularly when it comes to gender equality and increasing women's participation, which, of course, is much better for our economy as well. We're doing that through so many measures, particularly in terms of ensuring there are better wages and conditions, through our cheaper childcare initiatives and our 10 days paid domestic violence leave. We are absolutely committed to making sure that we do have that gender equality in place. On top of that, last year, along with the minister, we launched the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. We outlined our shared vision to end gender based violence within one generation, and we are very proud of that plan. It's our strong commitment to 10 years of sustained action to really work towards eliminating all forms of gender based violence. A major component of that plan is taking a whole-of-government approach to addressing the root causes of domestic and family violence, one of those being gender inequality. This is one of the many initiatives that our government has pursued in terms of addressing gender equality, and this bill today does exactly that. It really is so important. The changes that have come in this bill—the first stage; the government's reforms—really lay the foundation for our strong commitment to expanding paid parental leave. The government will bring forward more legislation, which will progressively increase the scheme by six weeks until it reaches 26 weeks in 2026—a full six months of leave. This is the largest expansion of paid parental leave since Labor established the scheme in 2011. As I've said, the changes in this bill send a clear message that we treat parenting as an equal partnership that supports gender equality. We value men as carers, and we want to see that reinforced in workplaces, in our communities and in community attitudes right across the country. The government's paid parental leave reform is incredibly good for parents, good for kids, good for employers and, very importantly too, very good for our economy in terms of increasing workforce participation. As a mother of two now adult children, I am absolutely proud of how far we have come as a nation and how so much has changed in that time, particularly because of the actions of Labor governments. I'm very, very proud to be speaking on a bill that will really assist many families to navigate an ever-changing world. It will indeed help them in terms of their family and financial situations and their capacity to be able to work as well. I'm really proud to be part of a government that does value gender equality as a priority. I would like to acknowledge that this government has a strong commitment to it. In terms of this bill, I certainly want to note and acknowledge the wonderful Minister for Social Services for introducing this bill. It is indeed a very proud, historic moment for all of us in the Albanese Labor government. I commend the bill to the House. 10:43 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I would like to sum up by thanking all those who have contributed to the important debate on the Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Improvements for Families and Gender Equality) Bill 2022. As I've said before in this place, improving paid parental leave is a critical nation-building reform. It's critical for families, it's critical for women and it's critical for the economy. Paid parental leave is a proud Labor legacy, and the Albanese government is building and expanding on that legacy. The number of government and non-government members who have spoken on these reforms over the course of the debate shows how important this issue is to so many Australians. At the Jobs and Skills Summit in September, unions and businesses jointly articulated the importance of investing in paid parental leave and the benefits for women's workforce participation and economic growth. The Albanese government listened and took action, committing half a billion dollars in the October budget to improve the scheme and expand it to six months by 2026. We've wasted no time delivering on this commitment. The changes in this bill modernise paid parental leave so that it is right for the time and right for the future. We know that dads and partners want more time at home with their baby. We know that parents want flexibility in how they choose to take leave and transition back to work. We know that the current eligibility rules are unfair to families where the mother is the higher income earner. This bill fixes those problems. It gives more families access to the payment, provides parents with more flexibility in how they take their leave and encourages them to share care to support gender equality. From 1 July 2023 the government is improving the paid parental leave scheme by: combining the two existing payments into a single 20-week scheme, reserving two weeks of leave for each parent to support them both to take time off work, making it easier for both parents to access the payment by removing the notion of 'primary' and 'secondary' carers; expanding access to around 3,000 more families each year by introducing a new $350,000 family income test; expanding access to around 1,500 more dads and partners each year through a new, simpler claiming process; and increasing flexibility for parents to choose how they take the government paid leave and transition back to work. It is critical that this bill passes both houses by 9 March to ensure that parents who are expecting to give birth or adopt after 1 July 2023 have the opportunity of pre-claiming three months in advance. I thank the government and non-government members for their positive engagement with me and my office on this bill. I note that the bill is currently before the Community Affairs Legislation Committee, which will deliver its report by 24 February, ahead of the Senate's consideration in early March. I'd like to thank those senators and the committee secretariat for their work and particularly acknowledge the Chair, Senator Marielle Smith. I'd also like to thank everyone who made a written submission to the inquiry. I'm very pleased to see the strong support for the bill from a diverse range of employer, union and community groups in their submissions, including UNICEF Australia, the Australian Institute of Family Studies, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Salvation Army, the Australian Human Rights Commission, the Global Institute for Women's Leadership, and Diversity Council Australia. As many of these organisations noted, this bill is a crucial step towards a parental leave scheme that empowers the full and equal participation of women. It implements the first tranche of the government's half-billion-dollar investment in paid parental leave. The reform is being legislated in two stages so that the critical structural changes in the bill can commence as early as possible, with families who are expecting to give birth on or after 1 July 2023 able to pre-claim from late March. I look forward to bringing another bill to the parliament later this year to legislate the second tranche of the government's reform plan, the expansion of the scheme to 26 weeks, which will commence from 1 July 2024. The Women's Economic Equality Taskforce is currently examining the best model for the expansion to 26 weeks and will provide advice to the government later this year. The changes in this bill and expansion to 26 weeks demonstrates the government's commitment to deliver better outcomes for families and advance women's economic equality. Around 180,000 families each year will benefit from a fairer, more flexible and more generous scheme. The Albanese government is committed to a paid parental leave scheme that supports modern Australian families. That's what this bill delivers, and I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Third Reading 491 10:49 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022 491

Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading 491 10:50 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I rise to speak in support of the Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022. Work health and safety laws in Australia are a shared responsibility. Each jurisdiction is responsible for implementing, regulating and enforcing its own work health and safety laws. Australia has model work health and safety laws that have been adopted in all jurisdictions except Victoria, which has similar laws in place. These model work health and safety laws are developed and administered by an independent statutory body, Safe Work Australia, through a process involving all jurisdictions as well as employer and employee representatives. In 2018 the five-yearly review of the model work health and safety laws was commissioned by Safe Work Australia. Safe Work Australia appointed independent reviewer Ms Marie Boland to conduct the review. The Boland review found the laws were largely operating as intended, and the 34 recommendations from the Boland review were mainly clarifying in nature. In May 2021 Senator Cash, as the then Commonwealth minister responsible for work health and safety, convened a work health and safety ministers meeting to consider the response to the Boland review. Ministers agreed on action for all 34 recommendations of the Boland review, reflecting the cooperative approach to the discussions. The key outcome of the meeting was ministers' unanimous agreement to introduce gross negligence or equivalent as a fault element for category 1 offences, which apply when a worker is killed or suffers a serious injury or illness, which this bill will introduce. The bill before the House introduces the first tranche of policy decisions that were settled in that ministers meeting. These decisions were: amending the model work health and safety laws to provide that a work group is negotiated with workers who are proposed to form the work group, recommendation 7b; amending the obligation to train health and safety representatives to provide that health and safety representatives are entitled to choose a course of training, recommendation 10; to align the process for the issuing and service of notices under the model Work Health and Safety Act to provide clarity and consistency, recommendation 16; providing the ability for inspectors to require the production of documents and answers to questions for 30 days after the day they or another inspector enter a workplace, recommendation 17; enabling and clarifying that work health and safety regulators can participate in cross-border information sharing, recommendation 19; amending the Work Health and Safety Act to include gross negligence as a fault element in the category 1 offences under the Work Health and Safety Act, recommendation 23a; extending the 12-month deadline to 18 months for a person to make a request to the regulator to bring a prosecution for a category 1 or 2 offence, recommendation 24; and prohibiting the insurance for work health and safety fines and inclusion of offences for breaching this prohibition, recommendation 26. In this bill the government is also setting the fines for the newly created offence of providing insurance for work health and safety penalties. One of the most important aspects of this bill is the introduction of gross negligence as a fault element for category 1 offences and extension of time. Any workplace death is a tragedy, and one death is one too many. Currently, category 1 offences have a standard of recklessness, which requires prosecutors to prove any intent to disregard a risk of death or serious injury. This can be difficult to prove at times. The bill introduces recommendation 23a of the Boland review, which was the inclusion of gross negligence as a fault element in category 1 offences. This recommendation was universally supported by all jurisdictions. Grossly negligent conduct, as well as recklessness, should attract the most serious penalties under our work health and safety laws. This is why, when in government, the coalition supported the decision to introduce this change. By introducing the fault element of gross or criminal negligence the change will ensure that the appropriate threshold is set to capture culpable conduct but also preserve the current risk based approach adopted in the category 1 offence. A category 1 offence is an offence by a person engaging in conduct that exposes an individual to whom a duty is owed to a risk of death or serious injury being reckless as to the risk. For example, an employer in the construction industry does not provide safety equipment such as harnesses, netting or railing in an open-air elevated workplace, and an employee severely injures himself or herself. The employer in this circumstance may be penalised under a category 1 offence, as the employer was grossly negligent, reckless or both in their work health and safety duty, which led to a serious injury. This means businesses, as well as workers, with a work health and safety duty can be penalised if they are needlessly reckless or negligent in their duty. It also means, where accidents do occur, businesses or workers with work health and safety duties will not be unfairly penalised when they have taken the appropriate steps to minimise the risk of death or serious injury. Importantly, it continues the key principle of a risk based approach for the work health and safety laws, as opposed to focusing on the outcome that occurs. It is critical that prosecutions and higher penalties apply not only when a death or serious injury or illness occurs but when there is a near miss due to gross or criminal negligence. This is important if Australian workplaces are to become safer for all. The priority must be on strengthening the risk based approach of the work health and safety framework and to apply higher penalties equally to near misses and to serious injuries if they are due to the same underlying conduct, and these decisions in the bill do this. This bill will also extend the deadline for requests of regulators to bring prosecution for category 1 and category 2 offences. This was another recommendation of the Boland review, which the former coalition government supported in the work health and safety ministers meeting. This extension means that another six months will be provided before a person loses the ability to request a regulator to bring a prosecution. This gives more time for the person, especially due to the likelihood in these incidences for significant recovery and/or grieving, to provide information as to why processes presently could result in the missing of the deadline. This bill will also prevent a person being required to pay a penalty under law from being able to recover that penalty under a contract of insurance. The banning of the provision of insurance or indemnity products for criminal fines and penalties is not uncommon in Australia. For example, the Corporations Act 2001, the Financial Accountability Regime and the FAR's predecessor, the Banking Executive Accountability Regime, have similar provisions in place to prohibit the provision of insurance and indemnity for penalties. Under the Fair Work Act 2009, federal courts have the ability to make personal payment orders for breaches of that act. This was an often used provision to require payment by members of the CFMMEU in matters brought to the court by the now abolished Australian Building and Construction Commission. The power to do this was reconfirmed by the High Court in the Australian Building and Construction Commission v CFMEU (2018). The rationale given in the review is that the provision of insurance and/or indemnification for work health and safety penalties undermines the deterrent effect of imposing such penalties. This rationale makes much sense and is accepted in similar scenarios to require personal payment for misconduct. This is the reason that the coalition supported this recommendation. It is important to clarify, for the record, that this part of the bill will not criminalise access to insurance or indemnity arrangements for legal costs in defending the prosecution. The Boland review expressly stated that companies and officers should not be precluded from accessing insurance or indemnity arrangements for legal costs in defending a prosecution. The legislation before us does not do that. It only prevents the provision of insurance and indemnity products in circumstances where prosecution has been successful and a penalty has been imposed. The bill would also amend the Safe Work Australia Act to clarify that information necessary to support Safe Work Australia's data and evidence functions may be provided to Safe Work Australia. Safe Work Australia is the national policy body for work health and safety and workers compensation. Its members represent the interests of Commonwealth, state and territory governments as well as employers and workers. As part of its role in developing these national policies and strategies, Safe Work Australia maintains and publishes national datasets to help inform policies which can improve Australia's workplace health and safety arrangements. Maintaining national datasets and developing evidence based research relies on input from a range of sources, including the authorities of Australia's various states and territories as well as the Commonwealth. The amendments in this bill will provide that persons with relevant information—including work health and safety regulators and workers compensation bodies—are able to provide that information to Safe Work Australia. The work health and safety ministers meeting also recommended that the Work Health and Safety Regulations be amended to deal with psychological risks and injury. This was recommendation 2 of the Boland review. Amending the regulations in this way represented a strengthening of our commitment to addressing and preventing psychological injury in Australian workplaces. This recommendation responds to stakeholder concern at the absence of specific regulation on this issue, and should assist businesses—particularly small businesses—in meeting their obligations in relation to psychological health. Many recommendations agreed at the May 2021 meeting respond to concerns raised by families who have been affected by workplace deaths, and they overlap with a number of recommendations contained in the Senate inquiry report into industrial deaths, They never came home. Ministers also agreed for Safe Work Australia to work with relevant experts to undertake a review into the feasibility of developing national work health and safety sentencing guidelines—recommendation 25. The ministers also endorsed the national principles to support families following an industrial death. These principles were developed by Safe Work Australia in response to the recommendations of the Senate inquiry report into industrial deaths, They never came home. All ministers agreed to task Safe Work Australia to work with experts to determine whether it was possible or feasible for there to be national work health and safety sentencing guidelines which would help further harmonise regulatory responses to similar situations occurring in different jurisdictions. In the same meeting, all work health and safety ministers agreed that Safe Work Australia should produce and publish the model code of practice, 'Managing the risks of respirable crystalline silica from engineered stone in the workplace'. Other work that Safe Work Australia is undertaking as a result of the actions of the former coalition government include drafting amendments to the model Work Health and Safety Regulations to prohibit the uncontrolled processing of engineered stone, publishing revised national guidance on working with silica and silica-containing products and developing additional guidance materials on managing the risks of occupational lung diseases. All Australians have a right to be safe in the workplace, and it is important to Australians, whether they be employers or employees, that there are consistent laws around workplace health and safety. This bill makes important changes that further strengthen that consistency and continue the principle of having risk based workplace health and safety laws while further clarifying and improving understanding of those laws. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Reference to Federation Chamber 494 11:05 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I declare that the Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022 is referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration. Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022 494

Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022

Second Reading 494 11:05 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson I rise to speak on the Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022. The bill before the House will allow for time-limited trials of trade and customs practices with approved entities in a controlled regulatory environment known as a regulatory sandbox. The bill contains two schedules: schedule 1, which contains the provisions relating to the regulatory sandbox framework; and schedule 2, which contains technical amendments which, amongst other things, relate to the process in which notices of intention to propose customs tariff alterations occur. In speaking to this bill I note that the coalition introduced the Customs Amendment (Controlled Trials) Bill 2021 in the previous parliament, with that bill dealing with the same subject matter as this bill. The bill the government has introduced is for all intents and purposes the same bill the coalition introduced, especially those provisions at schedule 1, with the only additions being those technical amendments incorporated into schedule 2. I'd like to thank the minister for the government's ringing endorsement of our simplified trade system agenda, of which this bill formed a part. The bill encourages innovation in testing new business models and regulatory approaches with appropriate safeguards through allowing the modification or waiver of existing licensing, importing and exporting obligations under the Customs Act 1901. The Comptroller-General of Customs, under these amendments, will be provided with the power to vary, suspend or revoke an entity's approval to participate in a controlled trial. In doing so, they must provide the entity with a written notice, along with a minimum of seven days before the notice takes effect. Taking part in a controlled trial is voluntary, with the trials themselves restricted to a maximum limited duration of no more than 18 months, with no imposition of penalty or sanction for failure to comply with the trial. However, the comptroller-general has the ability to suspend or revoke an entity's approval, as previously outlined, and this is not subject to merits review. By placing the qualification criteria and rules for controlled trials in delegated legislation, it will allow for controlled trials to be undertaken with a greater degree of certainty and can be administered effectively and in a timely manner. I note that the previous bill was referred to the Senate's Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee, which recommended that that iteration of the bill be passed. Labor members of that committee at the time complained that aspects of the bill, such as the qualification criteria for participation in controlled trials, would be administered through delegated legislation rather than primary legislation. Despite belonging to the same party which voiced these complaints, the minister has now proposed the exact same bill. I note my colleague the member for La Trobe, who was the responsible assistant minister at the time, aptly responded to these complaints, noting that flexibility is required in a dynamic trade environment and that the use of delegated legislation means changes can be made more expeditiously, as opposed to bringing new legislation through the parliament each time. Delegated legislation is also subject to parliamentary oversight through disallowance processes. If we came to this place to amend the Customs Act 1901 each time a controlled trial was being considered, it would defeat the very purpose of having controlled trials. This bill marks the new minister's ringing endorsement of the coalition's simplified trade system, known as the STS agenda. I appreciate she has seen the value of a more flexible and productive trade system. The coalition's STS agenda aimed to make cross-border trade for Australian businesses easier and less costly. The STS agenda will mean businesses are more productive, supply chains are more secure and the ABF can direct more attention to addressing higher-order threats. The Home Affairs portfolio was leading a number of initiatives under the STS agenda and making a significant contribution to supporting whole-of-government efforts to simplify the end-to-end trade environment for business. I sincerely hope that the home affairs department is able to continue this contribution, given that the portfolio was gutted by this government when it came to power. I sincerely hope that the work we did continues, but very little legislation has come through from this portfolio area. We note that the minister responsible for this area has refused to back legislation, particularly in relation to ransomware, and, as we saw this week, she let the ball drop on a key pillar of Operation Sovereign Borders. I am glad that with this bill at least they've seen the value of the work that was already done and brought this forward. Given the economic conditions being created under this Labor government, businesses will need every support and every opportunity to keep their heads above water. Rising energy prices, rising interest rates and the rising cost of living are putting the squeeze on household budgets. These will all have an impact on our businesses. We certainly are in for some challenging times under this new government. The coalition, however, will always support good policy that seeks to make life easier for businesses, and for that reason I commend the bill to the House. 11:11 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I rise to speak in support of the Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022. I will to make a brief contribution with two points. Firstly, I really hope that the adoption of this legislation, and the flexibility that it creates for the department to look at a whole range of trials within the prescribed format of this legislation, leads to broader change around the administration of export regulations within our government. Hopefully, it will provide a good opportunity to show that we can simplify things, make things more straightforward for our exporters and, in particular, look for ways to digitise processes and make things as smooth as possible. I have a lot of experience in export documentation. Regrettably, most of it does not evoke pleasant memories. We understand the need for a very robust framework, particularly around things like biosecurity, and we want to make sure that all of our compliance is where it needs to be. Certainly, in my experience, all of the general bureaucratic processes around exporting tend to lag way behind technology. This is an opportunity for the department to proactively take opportunities suggested to it and undertake trials within the sandbox that the legislation envisages. I hope that we see this driving broader change in the way in which the bureaucracy operates. We're here as a government to make it as easy as possible for people to export from our country. I really urge the government and the department to take any opportunity we have to learn from this and make exporting easier for everyone. Secondly, because I have the opportunity in this debate, I want to make sure that we're always remembering how common it is for other nations—I won't name any of them—to use bureaucracy and administration to frustrate market access. This is something that happens very regularly. From a policy point of view, we think we have free trade agreements in place. We think we have World Trade Organization rules and frameworks that mean there's certain market access. However, both in my previous career and since being a member here, I've dealt with many examples where this is not the case. In some of the markets that Australian businesses are exporting to, their governments and bureaucracies take every opportunity they can to frustrate and limit opportunities for good Australian exporting businesses, which are legally entitled to access their markets under the international trade frameworks we're all part of. One of the most ridiculous examples was the changing of species definition of seafood from the original Latin designations to a vernacular designation; the exact same product was suddenly held at the border. Seafood in a cold chain storage environment was held at the border and and/or not released into a freight corridor because of that kind of a change. It was absolutely designed to attempt to destroy that business that was succeeding in that market. I think that that government absolutely did what they could to punitively make an administrative change that could have meant—thankfully it didn't—that that business was going to go to the wall. They were going to implement some protectionism around their domestic producers through that underhanded way. Because this really talks about export measures, in conclusion I would also ask the government, when we are negotiating free trade agreements and doing the important work we do at the World Trade Organization at a multilateral level, to reflect and think about and pull together these examples of the frustrations that are put in place at the border, at the points of entry, by certain nations that are not playing within the spirit of the agreements we've got. That's relevant to this legislation because, obviously, we are looking for opportunities to make it easier and streamline processes for our exporters, and there are absolutely opportunities to put some stronger and more robust frameworks in place and some consequences for our partners in these agreements to make sure that they are purporting to want to provide market access to certain producers, like we do in return. We are never guilty of this in our country, I might add, despite some of the outrageous claims about our important, strong biosecurity framework. We absolutely have a very clear, transparent set of rules and procedures around that. But I think we should be looking for ways of putting a bit more pressure on some of these markets that are using that sort of trickery like the example that I have just outlined to frustrate market access. We all want to play by the same rules. We all want it to be a fair, open competition. Australia has never been frightened of a fair contest when it comes to the industries that are so successfully exported from our nation. All we want to do is play by the rules. With those comments, I commend the bill to the House. 11:17 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I thank the previous speakers on the Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022. I think the member for Sturt gave a really interesting contribution. I know he comes from a state where exports are a critical part of the local economy, in particular in relation to food and produce. The points he makes are really valid. We do face really significant issues around non-trade barriers in our dealings with other countries. We have furious debates in this parliament and around the world about trade agreements, but often it's the things that are not in those agreements that are used to inhibit our great exporters in this country selling their goods to the world. It's a really important point that I'm glad he has raised in this debate. I caught part of the contribution of the shadow minister for home affairs. If you strip out some of the political rhetoric from it, I think the shadow minister made some really good points. I would hope that as a parliament we have our fierce disagreements about various things, but making sure that basic functions like our customs and border control work for Australians and Australian businesses is an area where we don't have to fight. I'm really glad we've got strong bipartisan support for the direction the government is taking, which is the direction that was also supported by the previous government. In that vein, I will just quickly outline the bill. The Customs Legislation Amendment (Controlled Trials and Other Measures) Bill 2022 will amend the Customs Act 1901. The bill will support the development of new regulatory approaches and business models in customs and trade, with appropriate legislative safeguards. It will also enable the Australian Border Force, in partnership with industry, to test new customs practices and technologies. This bill will create a legislative framework to enable time limited trials with approved entities in a controlled regulatory environment. This bill also modernises Customs law to align with current legislative practice. The amendments will provide more certainty to the process for altering Customs tariffs. The ability to trial innovative regulatory approaches is an essential tool to guide reform initiatives. Running trials through a regulatory sandbox will enable the Australian Border Force to partner with industry to develop the evidence base to inform regulatory reform over the long term. The controlled trials bill is an important enabler for the whole-of-government simplified trade system agenda. It will assist the government to test new approaches within the Australian Customs framework while maintaining and achieving Australia's border security objective. The bill deserves support, and I commend it to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Third Reading 496 11:20 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH 496 GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH Address-in-Reply 496 11:21 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide I rise to speak in continuation on the address-in-reply. When I left off, I was talking about the cost of living and how Australians are really feeling it and have been doing it tough. That's why this government, the Albanese Labor government, is helping by making child care more affordable. The rising cost of child care has put a lot of pressure on families and is continuing to drag on economic participation and productivity. We know that a lot of parents may choose not to go to work, because it's just not economically viable for them because of the cost of child care. This is a key election commitment that will reduce the cost of child care for more than a million families. I have been speaking to parents in my electorate who have been saying that this will ensure that their home purse-strings will be lightened by this because they will be able to participate in the workforce or work that extra day or extra few hours that will make the difference. We are also instructing the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to design a price regulation mechanism to drive down out-of-pocket costs. The ultimate goal is to add affordable child care to the list of universal services alongside Medicare, the NDIS and superannuation, which Australians cherish and which are all Labor reforms. This is what Labor governments do best. Another area that this government is acting on is a fair go at work. The nature of work has changed enormously over the years, with the gig economy, increased casualisation and stagnant or declining wages. We saw under the former government declining wages—absolutely stagnant wages—with the lowest wage growth in the history of this nation. All that means is that workers today face much more precarious working conditions than they did in the past decade. So not only are we supporting an increase in the minimum wage—one of our first acts when we formed government in May last year was to write to the Fair Work Commission—but we will seek to ensure that Australia's laws catch up to this reality and protect people from exploitation and unsafe working conditions. This Labor government will aim to make secure work an objective of the Fair Work Act and legislate to make wage theft a crime. We on this side of the chamber take manufacturing seriously. The government will seek to rebuild Australia's proud manufacturing industry through a commitment to a future made in Australia. This is particularly important for my home state of South Australia, which was a manufacturing state. We had everything from Chrysler and Mitsubishi to General Motors Holden—all gone now. This manufacturing gave good, solid work to people for many, many years. It provided them with income. It provided for their families. It was solid work. It was consistent work. But unfortunately in 2013, when the Liberal Abbott government came to power, we saw how they treated General Motors Holden, just with the speeches made in this place. I remember very well how the then Treasurer, Mr Hockey, got up and basically goaded GMH. The following day, there was a front-page article in the Advertiser in South Australia saying, 'We're shutting our doors.' That speech had a lot to do with it. We had a company in South Australia manufacturing vehicles—one of only 13 places in the world where it was done from design to showroom. It was done in South Australia, and we've lost all that. That's why we're taking manufacturing seriously. It's very important to my home state, and we need to ensure that the investment in skills does not go to waste. We need to ensure that all those skills in car manufacturing and other manufacturing do not go to waste and that future submarines are built in Australia—and we're seeing work already being done down there. We also need to support and foster our wonderful space industry. I'm very proud to have the Australian Space Discovery Centre right in the middle of my electorate, in Lot Fourteen in Adelaide. It's providing, already, great research and great jobs. I'm glad that the Minister for Defence Industry is here in the room. We've visited it a few times together, down at Lot Fourteen, and seen some of the great work that's being done in conjunction with Defence and the University of Adelaide. We've visited some incredible companies based in SA that were attracted to our state because of the investment commitment that we have shown to this industry. So I truly welcome this Labor government's proposed $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund to grow and diversify Australia's industrial base. The fund will take, as its mission, supporting new and emerging industries. It will help our economy transition to reach net zero emissions by 2050 and create secure, well-paid jobs for Australian workers, driving regional economic development and building on our sovereign capability. I am also proud of the achievements in my electorate of Adelaide. I spoke briefly about some of them. We've been able to assist many schools and organisations in my electorate. I am really pleased about the Challa Gardens Primary School, St George College and Richmond Primary School being successful in receiving funding commitments, which are being rolled out currently. Each of these schools were successful in their applications for funding as part of the $440 million the government is investing in local schools around Australia. Challa Gardens Primary School will receive $50,000 towards the establishment of an outdoor learning area. This funding will be used for the construction of a veranda to connect the school buildings. St George College has been allocated $50,000 towards their classroom upgrade project, and Richmond Primary School has been allocated a combined $40,000. Ten thousand dollars of this investment is for the establishment of an outdoor learning area, specifically for the purchase of settings on the southern side of the school, and the remaining $30,000 is for upgrading of laptops and a charge, store and secure station. I was down there before the last federal election, and they showed me where they would go in the current facilities that they have. They are due for upgrading, so I'm very pleased that Richmond Primary School will be receiving this grant. I'm certain that the children attending the three schools that I've just mentioned will enjoy these new facilities. My electorate of Adelaide also has many deserving sporting and community clubs. I was pleased to support a number of social groups, community clubs and sporting clubs in my electorate to receive funding to help them undertake much-needed upgrades for their communities. These included the Adelaide Omonia Cobras Football Club and the Adelaide Bowling Club. The Adelaide Bowling Club is one of the oldest in South Australia. In fact, its first premises were on the site where today's South Australian Government House is. When they built Government House and expanded its land, they had to move, and they're now on the eastern Park Lands. The Cobras football club plan to build a new electronic scoreboard which will have video and audio broadcasting capabilities. They also need perimeter fencing at their soccer precinct at Weigall Oval in order to be able to go to the next level in the competition. They're a great club. They have juniors from under 8s to under 10s right through to seniors first division football, which are doing quite well. They're a great community club that works to promote football but also reaches out to the community to get kids to participate. We know how important it is for kids to participate in sport. It's wonderful to go down there on training nights and see families with kids of all ages participating. The Adelaide Bowling Club, South Australia's oldest lawn bowls club, is in dire need of new kitchen facilities to meet the club's growing needs. One of the best aspects of my work as a member of parliament is to assist and help such deserving clubs in my electorate, which all of us try to do. I'm very pleased to support these funding requests. My electorate will also benefit from a significant funding injection in the health space—$77 million will go towards comprehensive cancer centres in my electorate. These cancer centres will be co-located at the Australian Bragg Centre for Proton Therapy and Research and the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institution. These cancer centres are expected to result in 2,000 cancer cases prevented, diagnosed early and treated in South Australia annually. The centre will also assist patients from the NT. This is fantastic news for South Australians and our world-class research and medical services. In addition, one of the 50 urgent care clinics that were announced will be located in the electorate of Adelaide. These urgent care clinics will take the pressure off emergency departments. In 2020-21, 47 per cent of presentations in emergency departments were classified as semi-urgent or not urgent. People end up going to emergency departments because they often do not have an alternative. The urgent care clinic that will be in my electorate will provide an alternative so that people can access the urgent care they need. Urgent care clinics will provide a place where people can get timely and appropriate care and take the pressure off our emergency departments. We have also announced an additional 1,645 university places for South Australians to train as teachers, nurses and engineers. This corresponds to an investment of $48 million in South Australian universities, the majority of which are located in the electorate of Adelaide, including the University of South Australia and the University of Adelaide. This represents a real commitment to education and training and also addresses the skills shortages our economy is currently facing. Finally, the Albanese Labor government has invested $200 million into an upgrade at the intersection of Marion Road and Cross Road, which is also the intersection between three electorates, the electorate of Boothby, the electorate of Hindmarsh and my electorate of Adelaide. I'm pleased that the member for Boothby is here. She will have much more to say about this in the future. The project will see grade separation of the tram level crossing and the widening of the Anzac Highway-Marion Road intersection. This is a significant project that has been called on by the people of the federal seat of Adelaide, the federal seat of Boothby and the federal seat of Hindmarsh for many, many years. I'm very pleased that it will improve congestion and safety for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. There's a lot to do for this Labor government. We have a long way to go. We are doing everything we can to take the cost-of-living pressures off families. Today we saw paid parental leave. We've put child care in place. These are things that will really have an effect on families. On 1 January, we lowered the cost of medicines—a real drop in the price—which will affect people's pockets in a good way. You will see many more things coming out of this Labor government, because it's only Labor governments that really help and support working families and assist people in having a future to pay their bills, to pay their mortgages, to send their kids to school and to ensure they have a good health service. These are the things that Australians are crying out for; these are the things that we will be doing. 11:34 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest My electorate of Forrest is a beautiful part of Australia and a wonderful place to live, to work, to invest, to raise a family and to retire. It is also one of the most diverse electorates in Australia, with mining and resource manufacturing, agriculture and horticulture, forestry and fisheries, tourism, building construction and significant civil works companies in the logistics space and also in retail and hospitality. As I start my speech, I just want to acknowledge the work that's ongoing in my electorate by our voluntary and professional emergency services people. They do an extraordinary amount of work. Right at this moment, throughout my electorate and other parts of Western Australia, there has been a great need for the work of our voluntary and professional emergency services, from the floods that we've seen in the north to a range of bushfires right throughout our part of the world, including my own electorate of Forrest. So I want to say a special thankyou to those people. And it's not just those people. When there is a bushfire, and it affects a neighbour, often it's our local farmers with their own fire units on the back of their utes who will front up for their neighbour. This is how the small regional communities and the farming sector work together and constantly contribute to the community. So I want to acknowledge and thank them for that. I've seen a fair bit of it, with the significant lightning storm in our part of the world. In government we had a very effective and clear regional, rural and remote set of programs that delivered real, sound results, not just in Forrest but right around regional Australia. One very strongly supported program, particularly by local governments—it is the one that they have been seeking most—was the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. The City of Bunbury was able to put the funding that they received towards a fantastic skate park for young people in the city itself. It is so popular, but it wouldn't have been done without those funds. We supported a sports precinct in Dunsborough and the pump track in Egan Park in Donnybrook. These are just a few examples of how this fund was used by local governments to provide wonderful infrastructure for local communities and things that the community really needed and wanted. It is the same with the Building Better Regions Fund for the Apple Fun Park in Donnybrook, which is visited by people from right around the state and even international visitors. It's a great place for families to stop at. The South Bunbury Football Club saw a benefit out of this with their improvement of Hands Oval. In the aged-care sector, we supported the Armstrong Village in Dunsborough itself. The Bridges Renewal Program has been really important in rural, regional and remote Australia, particularly for small councils that have an extraordinary amount of road and a huge number of bridges, often key export and logistics connections. They really benefited from and needed this funding. The road Black Spot funding program has been so important in rural and regional Australia. And in the telecommunications space I was so proud of the first Mobile Black Spot Program, because there wasn't such a program previously. We were able to get so many of these on the ground in rural, regional and remote areas, and that is so important in our part of the world. That's what we heard back so often from right around Australia. We funded key infrastructure from enablers around the Busselton Margaret River Airport and the Busselton Jetty. It's the longest jetty in the Southern Hemisphere; I encourage you to go and have a visit. It has a beautiful underwater observatory at the other end. There is a significant 80 per cent federal government investment for the Bunbury Outer Ring Road. This is also about linking the Busselton Margaret River Airport with the greater southern region and the south-west for freight and logistics—a really important task—as well as servicing and linking the port of Bunbury to gain all the access that's needed. Equally important was the funding we put into dualling the Bussell Highway from Capel to Busselton. For anyone who travels that highway regularly—from people completing all the heavy freight tasks to the massive number of tourists who come through our region, heading further south for holidays and weekends—it's really critical to road safety. We supported aged-care facilities in those areas where aged care is really difficult and challenging and often very expensive to provide, especially investing in infrastructure, when often it's a community group engaged in this, whether in Harvey, in Donnybrook or in Dunsborough, as I mentioned. I was able to secure a designated migration agreement for our area, given that we'd key shortages for many years. This is something that was very useful to business and individual small businesses. Another plan that I was really happy with was the first-ever National Plan for Endometriosis, for those one in 10 women who are affected by this condition, and the significant funding we put in to research in the pelvic pain space and to the plan itself, as well as more education for schools and programs to run. I will continue to have an absolute focus on the ongoing investment that will be needed in the National Plan for Endometriosis and for pelvic pain education and pelvic pain clinics. I really want to see one of those in the south-west of WA. We also supported so many new medications—almost one a day in our time in government, and there were over 2,000 listed on the PBS. What a difference that has made to people's lives. In my part of the world, too, I have no doubt that the university department of rural health that we secured to help workforce training will become a key part of meeting the ongoing need in what is one of the fastest-growing areas and an area where people choose to retire. But I think an enduring legacy for all Australians was our investment and creation of the Medical Research Future Fund. All you have to do is look at where the funding in that has been allocated to universities right around Australia, for a wealth of research, such as into chronic disease and so many other conditions and issues. This is an enduring legacy that I am very proud that our government delivered for this nation, and it will deliver benefits right around Australia and, I suggest, globally as well. In regional education we had much to do when we came into government, especially around youth allowance and access to this allowance for young people from rural and regional areas. We'd seen what the previous government had done in that space, especially around the lack of access to youth allowance for young people from inner-regional areas. In WA we still have a lack of teachers, particularly in rural, regional and remote areas. Both of these are important matters, particularly around teaching and access to teachers and what the education sector is dealing with. One of the things that has had effects more broadly, not just in my part of the world, has been the changes Labor made in relation to the sourcing of general practitioners. The Distribution Priority Area identifies areas where there are shortages of doctors, especially GPs, and where international medical graduates have to work in a DPA to be eligible for Medicare. The changes have seen those area boundaries expand to include outer metro areas, which of course, when we've got shortages of GPs, puts more pressure on regional areas in trying to compete with outer metro areas for GPs. And gee that makes it hard—even harder than it normally is. I also want to touch on some of the great work we did around cybersafety and the various laws we introduced around online safety and image-based abuse. Members would know that I've spent a lot of my time in this parliament and in the community focused on cybersafety, particularly for young people. I've provided sessions and presentations for young people in schools in the community and in business. We established the Office of the eSafety Commissioner. It's a global leader, and I'm really proud of that. But I want to see more people accessing the services and supports that are available through the Office of the eSafety Commissioner. And I would have to say that in all my years of doing this work I have seen a marked deterioration in the mental and emotional health and wellbeing of young people through what's going on online. I struggle to find the time to deal with all of the issues that come from this. I see so many young people affected. Recent information from the eSafety Commissioner shows, for instance, that 30 per cent of young teens have been contacted online by a stranger, and that's beside the basic bullying, body image issues and also the challenge for them in this space of simply managing to get enough sleep. They're often gaming for many hours during the night. One principal, when I asked him what was affecting the mental health and wellbeing of his students the most, held up a mobile phone and said, 'My young people are simply not getting enough sleep, and it's affecting how they manage everything else in their lives.' Whether it's relationships, school or the challenges that young people have to manage, if they're not getting enough sleep, everything is so much harder. Even adults find the same thing. I have a challenge for anybody watching. My challenge to you is this: what are you going to do to be your very best self online all of the time? Because that's what's needed from all of us. All of us need to be our best selves online all of the time. When I look at the challenges currently existing and emerging in my part of the south-west of WA, like so much of rural and regional Australia, it's struggling with the shortages of workers and accommodation. The current rental availability in WA is about 0.6 per cent—I think that's right. We've got so many businesses, small businesses as well as larger ones, including aged-care providers, who've had to buy homes simply to house their workers, if they can get them, or provide their own on- or off-site accommodation. That goes right down to vegetable growers, who've had to invest significantly. Simply, they need the workforce and they need somewhere to house them, so they're investing in this space. I know that that problem exists whether you are the lithium producer Albemarle, in the Kemerton light industrial area, or in agriculture or horticulture or a small business in the hospitality sector. There's a real shortage of workers and tradespeople with what's happening in our south-west. Many businesses, of all sizes, are paying extraordinary wages just to retain or attract workers. One hire company in Bunbury recently said to me that they're currently paying their heavy-vehicle mechanic $162,000 to keep him there, as opposed to him going into the mining sector in the north. The challenge for the business comes when the hire company—we know what's happening with cost of living and issues of inflation across business—can't actually increase their equipment hire rates to reflect those extra costs of wages and other matters. That puts that business in a very difficult ongoing position. Many hospitality and tourism operators have struggled to get staff. During COVID we saw this happening really badly. Some small to medium enterprises shut their doors. A lot of our small-business people are absolutely exhausted because they've carried the load themselves and filled the gap throughout COVID. Even now, it's ongoing for them. Some cannot afford to open on days that attract penalty rates, particularly if there are two in one weekly pay cycle. They are personally exhausted and frustrated. They're dealing with constant inflation and increased input costs, and their customers are often unwilling, or unable, to pay higher prices for items. Some of them are actually changing what they're putting on their menus so that they can afford to stay in business and the people who come to those premises can afford to pay for what they're selling. As we know, for many local people, cost of living is a critical issue and they are making tough decisions right now. With those 800,000 people who have mortgages that are moving off fixed interest rates and onto variable interest rates, that will continue to be a focus for those individuals and families. Interest rates will also be a focus for small business. Often small-business owners have to mortgage their house or anything else that they've got just to get into small business. Each incremental increase is a cost to the business, and it depends how the bank prices that risk on that business as to the cost to the business. There could well be further risks ahead for businesses and industries. We don't want to see the South West being overlooked for federal government investment. There are great concerns in my part of the world around the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal and how Labor applies the safeguard mechanism. There are ongoing challenges for the building and construction sector, including the increase in inflation and input costs from the time of signing a fixed-price contract to the completion of the construction, and the potential loss. The businesses most at risk in this space are small to medium, privately owned businesses—not listed companies. I don't want to see those local businesses lost, because they're so often the ones that underpin our regional economy. They're the ones who train local people and local tradespeople who will stay in our regional communities and be wonderful. For a start sometimes these tradespeople get to a point where they start their own business. We saw a record number of apprentices come along in our time and take up the opportunities that we offered them. We want to see those young people be able to go into their own business in time and be able to train others, in the same way they've had that opportunity. That increased risk on private, unlisted companies and smaller companies—which is what we have in rural, regional and remote parts of Australia—is something that is of real concern for me in what's ahead. I want to continue to promote the agricultural sector and the quality that we see from our farmers and our agriculture sector. In my part of the world in the South West—and as people know, I'm a very proud dairy farmer—we, and much of Australia, produce some of the best quality food and fibre in the world. I'm extraordinarily proud of the work that our farmers do, and I want to encourage every one of them. I know for some young people trying to get into farming and trying to get into, say, the dairy industry, there are real challenges in finding a financial institution and an opportunity, because of what's required to get your foot in the door. I want to encourage great young people. Our farmers compete in a global export environment and they do it very well because often we're seeing they are low-cost producers. They have to be simply to compete, given that there is a high cost to doing business in Australia. That applies even in the farming sector, where we're expected to produce more, basically, with less land, less water and less fertiliser on one of the driest continents on earth. I also want to focus on the importance of the South West irrigation system in my part of the world. It is a critical piece of regional infrastructure. I think it could be the only gravity-fed irrigation system that we have, certainly in WA in this way. With the dams in the hills and the way that the cooperative has piped the northern section of this so it's fully enclosed, there are no channel losses. It's very efficient. No energy is required for this water to get to the farms where it's used for irrigation for all sorts of purposes as well as, in part, some industrial and other fit-for-purpose uses. It is a fantastic system. There's a second section in the Collie River irrigation district that desperately needs to be piped as well. Pump piping and even some desalination is needed for Wellington Dam, which provides this water. I sought support for this from the previous government and I'll be staying on this issue because this South West irrigation system and its great quality of water underpins not just much of the agriculture and food production but also much of the economy of the South West. Any of us who are from the primary sector, like me, tend to see water as more valuable than gold because, in the slogan of Harvey Water and South West irrigation, where water flows food grows. We've got a task. There's a global shortage of food ahead. We're in a prime position because we're great producers of quality product, and we need to be able to continue to be so. Debate adjourned. Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an ord er of the day for a later hour. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 501 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS National Security 501 11:54 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio by leave—The first responsibility of government is to provide for the safety and security of its people. The compact between a government and its citizens includes the defence of borders, a secure economic future, and the maintenance of the rule of law. But at the heart of this compact is sovereignty— The capacity of a people, through their government, to determine their own circumstances and to act of their own accord, free from any coercive influence. Defence capability is a key factor in sovereignty. It does not define sovereignty. There are proudly sovereign smaller countries which do not enjoy the capabilities of larger powers. And capability which is not at the absolute discretion of the country which operates it does nothing to enhance sovereignty. But capability—high-end capability—the use of which is at the complete discretion of a country, contributes greatly to the capacity of a people to determine their circumstances and therefore contributes greatly to national sovereignty. And in a world in which the rules-based order is under enormous strain, the threat of armed conflict is less remote, and foreign interference is more prevalent than ever, it has never been more important to guard, reinforce and enhance our sovereignty. Our strategic circumstances As I deliver this statement today our strategic circumstances are the most complex and challenging they have been since the end of the Second World War. The world around us is uncertain. The rules based order that has been vital to our security and prosperity is increasingly under pressure. Russia's illegal and immoral war in Ukraine is a salutary warning— It violates the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity enshrined in the United Nations Charter. And reminds us all of the importance of building partnerships and defence capabilities to deter and respond to those that seek to use power and might to reshape the world around them. It cannot be allowed to stand. In our region, we see very large military build-ups rivalling any in the post-war period. Expanding cyber and grey zone activities are blurring the line between peace and conflict. Nuclear weapon stockpiles are expanding without transparency and proliferation is increasingly difficult to verify. And the risk of conflict is less remote than in the past. We now live in a less safe and less stable world. A world that will demand more of Australia, our people, and our defence force to protect our way of life. We must ensure the security of our strategic geography and the viability of trade and supply routes. And to do this we must protect an inclusive regional order founded on rules agreed by all, rather than one which is defined by the power and might of a few. This will require us to strengthen our resilience so we can shape the future, rather than being shaped by it. In these times, it is more important than ever that Australia works closely with like-minded countries, key partners and our United States ally. If we are to meet the complex challenges before us, a stronger defence force must work hand-in-glove with enhanced diplomacy, intelligence, economic statecraft and development assistance. We should never forget that Australia's frontline is diplomacy. Our primary effort is to use our diplomacy to reduce tensions and create pathways for peace. At the same time, strengthening our defence capabilities fundamentally contributes to our ability to shape our strategic environment and respond to it—and it also allows us to pursue the interests of regional stability and to deter conflict. In doing so, we maintain our ability to determine, pursue and protect our national interests; Our ability to decide freely on a course of action in our interests; And our ability to develop and employ capabilities to advance these interests. And what is abundantly clear is that our deep partnerships and practical cooperation with our ally and partners protects and strengthens these capacities. Because our sovereignty is stronger when we work with others towards shared goals, in ways that respect each other's national interests. Our region and working with partners As a three-ocean nation, our interests stretch across the entirety of the Indo-Pacific. We have witnessed the immense benefits that peace, security and trade have bestowed on our region. We have greatly benefited from our trade with China. We value a productive relationship with China and we seek to stabilise this. But we are also seeing increasing strategic competition, with a more assertive China seeking to shape the world around it. In these times, it is more important than ever that we work with the countries of the region to continue to reduce tensions and maintain the peace and security that has underpinned economic prosperity. Australia's partnerships provide a critical advantage in advancing our national interests while navigating this complex strategic environment. Our partnerships represent a network of states that reinforce norms, principles and the rules based system to ensure a free, open and prosperous Indo-Pacific. By pooling resources and combining strengths, we can shape our future, reduce our vulnerability to coercion, and help deter conflict. This is why we are strengthening our relationships with key partners in the region, including Japan, Singapore, South Korea, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, India, and Indonesia. And why we continue to invest in the architecture of the region, such as ASEAN and the Quad, which is vital to the stability, security and economic prosperity of our region. It is also why our broader defence cooperation with regional partners, such as Singapore, is essential. Singapore shares our commitment to an open, inclusive, rules based and resilient Indo-Pacific region, with ASEAN centrality at its core. Since April 1971, we have also shared a joint commitment to close collaboration under the Five Power Defence Arrangements, along with Malaysia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. For over 30 years, our Singaporean friends have trained in Australia—to our mutual benefit. From major exercises at Shoalwater Bay, to helicopter training at the Oakey Army Aviation Training Centre and pilot training at RAAF Base Pearce. Australia has been proud to support Singapore to build its capability. And this cooperation contributes to our shared security. Singapore's training in Australia has also brought significant advantages, including investment in ADF facilities, and economic benefits to Australian businesses. And it has helped us in our time of need—we will never forget the contribution Singapore's Armed Forces made during the Black Summer bushfires in 2020 and the floods in 2022. All of these activities are consistent with the requirements of both countries, while respecting Australia's sovereignty. We are also deepening our relationship with Japan, with whom we share an enduring commitment to maintaining peace and stability in the region. Our special strategic partnership with Japan is evolving to meet growing risks to our shared values and mutual strategic interests. At our annual 2+2 dialogue in December last year, Japan and Australia committed to expanding and deepening our practical security and defence cooperation. The joint declaration agreed by Prime Ministers Albanese and Kishida commits our nations to consult each other on contingencies that may affect our sovereignty and regional security interests, and consider measures in response. Together with the Reciprocal Access Agreement our two countries signed last year, we are enhancing interoperability through more sophisticated joint exercises and operations, multilateral exercises with partners, mutual use of facilities, and personnel links and exchanges. And our ambition is to continue to grow and enhance such practical cooperation with other key partners. A framework that protects our sovereignty Our partnerships build our national capability and security. They are anchored in Australian sovereignty. Our cooperation with partners, including our US ally, is managed through robust policy frameworks and principles that maintain and protect our sovereignty. These frameworks govern the activities of foreign governments in, from or through Australia—and how we partner with other nations to acquire capabilities in line with our national interests. The Australian government will only approve foreign military or intelligence activities occurring in, from or through Australia where they are in our national interest. These decisions are not dictated by the interests of other nations. Rather, they are mutually agreed activities in the interests of both countries. These activities occur only at the invitation of the Australian government, with full respect for our sovereignty and our domestic and international laws. A fundamental principle underpinning these activities is the longstanding bipartisan policy of having no foreign bases on Australian sovereign territory. This means that partner activities occur on a rotational basis within Australian facilities or as a part of jointly operated facilities. Australia's national interests are also paramount in the government's decisions about defence capability acquisitions. Australia operates high-tech platforms and capabilities that we could only acquire from our partners and we could never completely build on our own. In the globalised networked world in which we live, this reality, to a greater or lesser degree, is actually true for every country. Our future nuclear powered submarines will clearly be an example of this. Yet whether our defence assets are developed indigenously, acquired from abroad or developed in partnership, Australia will always make sovereign, independent decisions as to how they are employed, because we will not trade sovereignty for capability. To do so would be illusory. For the only point of increased capability is to strengthen sovereignty. Most importantly, any decision for Australia to go to war or to use Australian territory or assets in an armed conflict remains solely a decision for the Commonwealth government of the day. The United States a lliance— o ur m ost v ital s ecurity p artner More than 80 years ago, Prime Minister John Curtin laid the foundations of the US alliance, declaring that we 'look to America'. The United States has been central to our national security ever since. Our alliance has strong bipartisan political support within this parliament as well as broad Australian public approval. That support is based on a foundation of trust, a long record of achievement and a shared vision for upholding the global rules-based order. The Albanese government is committed to building on those achievements in the years ahead. To that end, it is vital that the Australian public and this parliament understand the direction of our security cooperation with the United States, particularly in relation to activities in, from or through Australia. It is equally important to understand what this trajectory means for Australia's sovereignty. To those who argue that countries like Australia would be better off to go it alone, I say that our US alliance fundamentally strengthens, rather than diminishes, our sovereignty, because the alliance affords Australia capability, technology and intelligence advantages that we simply could not acquire or develop on our own. This expands our strategic options, makes us less vulnerable to coercive action, and enables Australia to pursue our national security interests far beyond what we could achieve alone. Joint f acilities—Australia's c ontribution to the a lliance Australia's cooperation with the United States through joint and collaborative facilities is one of our most longstanding security arrangements. Australia jointly operates three facilities with the United States—the Joint Defence Facility Pine Gap, the Joint Geological and Geophysical Research Station, and the Learmonth Solar Observatory. These facilities provide critical functions that directly support our national security, which we would not be able to realise by ourselves. This includes intelligence cooperation and communications that help ensure that Australia and our Five Eyes partners maintain an intelligence advantage. The insights and intelligence gained through the Five Eyes partnership play a vital role in informing decisions that protect and strengthen our sovereignty. These facilities also contribute to global counterterrorism efforts, verification and compliance monitoring of international arms control and disarmament agreements, and early warning of ballistic missile launches. The Joint Geological and Geophysical Research Station in Alice Springs, for example, plays a crucial role in the detection of nuclear weapons testing across the globe, helping to enforce compliance with the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and contributing to counter-proliferation efforts. These facilities are truly joint in nature, integrating both Australian and US operations under shared command and control by Australian and US personnel—which I have had the opportunity to see firsthand. The deputy chief of facility at Pine Gap, for example, is an Australian position—established under the Hawke government in 1988. Half of the personnel at Pine Gap are Australian. We also collaborate through Australian owned and controlled facilities, such as the Harold E Holt naval communication station and the Australian Defence Satellite Communications Station. These joint and collaborative facilities support the effectiveness of the extended deterrence commitments the United States provides. This is a fundamental contribution Australia makes to the alliance and from which we derive great benefit. Of course, Australia has a proud history of working toward nuclear disarmament. Successive governments have pursued initiatives to remove nuclear weapons as a threat to humanity. Australia was a founding member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and we were the first country to implement enhanced safeguards under the additional protocol to our comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA. In our commitment to the non-proliferation treaty, the Albanese government will continue to play our part in these efforts. But as Prime Minister Hawke first acknowledged in 1984—and successive governments of both sides have acknowledged since—in a world where nuclear weapons exist, Australia cannot rely on the full protection of extended nuclear deterrence from the United States without contributing to the alliance. In this era of great power competition, and with undeclared proliferation on the rise, this protection is more important than ever. Full Knowledge and Concurrence A fundamental element of our cooperation with the United States at these joint and collaborative facilities is our longstanding and bipartisan policy of 'full knowledge and concurrence', as articulated by the Hawke government. 'Full knowledge' means Australia has a full and detailed understanding of any capability or activity with a presence on Australian territory, or making use of Australian assets. 'Concurrence' means that Australia approves of the presence of a capability or function in Australia, in support of mutually agreed goals. These principles protect Australia's right to know, understand and agree to foreign government military and intelligence activities conducted in, from, or through Australia and through the use of our assets. Full knowledge and concurrence does not necessarily mean Australia approves each individual activity or task undertaken. Instead, it means we agree to the purpose of activities conducted in Australia, we are aware of the capabilities being used, and understand their expected outcomes. By necessity, the details of these activities cannot be revealed. But I can assure the parliament today and the Australian public that we maintain appropriate levels of oversight for the activities undertaken. Australia is consulted about any proposed new purpose for activities, as well as significant changes to an existing purpose or expected outcome. The mechanisms by which we achieve full knowledge and concurrence at these facilities are pragmatic—such as data sharing, and joint operations and activities. Our 'full knowledge and concurrence' framework is not set and forget—it evolves in line with advancements in technology, and with emerging opportunities, threats, risks and trends that affect Australian and US capabilities. But what remains constant—and which is regularly evaluated—is the alignment of these activities with our national interests and the maintenance of our sovereignty, which I reaffirm here today. Deepening Our Ties—Force Posture Initiatives Beyond the joint and collaborative facilities, a significant step change in our security cooperation with the United States was the establishment of the bilateral force posture initiatives by the Gillard Government in 2011, which began the first rotation of marines to Darwin and has expanded since. Successive Australian governments have held the view that a strong and active US military presence in the Indo-Pacific is vital for deterring actions that would threaten the stability and prosperity of the region, and the rules-based order on which we rely. And from relatively small beginnings this force posture cooperation has expanded to initiatives across the air, maritime, land and logistics domains. At the recent Australia-United States Ministerial Consultations in December 2022, I was proud to announce that we will further enhance our force posture cooperation with the United States. This will continue the rotational presence of US capabilities in Australia, including US bomber taskforce rotations, fighters and, in the future, US Navy and US Army capabilities. And we are working with the United States to upgrade our infrastructure and enhance our logistics networks to support these initiatives. Importantly, these initiatives also provide a platform to enhance our ability to work together and increase our interoperability with our valued Indo-Pacific partners. For example, we have recently invited Japan to increase its participation in these initiatives in Australia. And we already exercise together with Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Timor-Leste, leveraging the presence of the Marine Rotational Force-Darwin. The force posture initiatives expand our security by enhancing Australia's capacity to cooperate with partners, deter coercion and respond to a full range of potential scenarios in the Indo-Pacific. These initiatives take place under the 2014 Force Posture Agreement. The activities are mutually determined and only ever occur at the invitation of the Australian Government with full respect for our sovereignty and domestic and international law. Some wrongly argue that our cooperation on joint activities and facilities provokes potential adversaries. But we undertake this cooperation in a transparent way which builds stability in our region, deters conflict and enhances our own security. We will continue to work with the United States to enable the increase in breadth and complexity of force posture initiatives consistent with our strategic environment. The Albanese Government will ensure that future cooperation initiatives in Australia with the United States will occur within these established and robust frameworks and principles, including the Force Posture Agreement. AUKUS— the next chapter The trilateral AUKUS partnership is an example of how countries with shared values and a commitment to peace and security in the region can work together in innovative ways. The capability decisions we will make in the context of AUKUS are about strengthening our sovereignty, consistent with the principles and frameworks I have outlined today. Some argue that Australia's reliance on our partners for the acquisition of naval nuclear-propulsion technology gives rise to a dependence that undermines Australia's sovereignty. Yet the reality is that almost all of Australia's high-end capability is developed in cooperation with our partners. Submarines are no exception. And that dramatically enhanced capability dramatically enhances our sovereignty. We need to leverage expertise from the United Kingdom and the United States to help us along our optimal pathway—and building capability with them means we are better able to shape, deter and respond within our strategic landscape. The AUKUS partnership will also guide the accelerated development of advanced defence capabilities under Pillar Two. These capabilities will help us hold potential adversaries' forces at risk, at a greater distance and increase the cost of aggression against Australia and its interests. Through AUKUS, we are building Australian capability and expanding our strategic options. This represents a long-term commitment to building our self-reliance and, in turn, will enhance Australia's agency to pursue our sovereign interests. That is the essence of sovereignty. And, while there will be much more to say on AUKUS in the weeks and months ahead, Australia will always make sovereign, independent decisions on how our capabilities are employed. Conclusion Australia is no longer blessed with a benign strategic environment as we have been for much of the post-Cold War era. In the months and years ahead, we will continue to deepen and evolve our security cooperation with key partners and our US ally to address shared challenges in our strategic environment and advance our mutual security interests. This cooperation will continue to take place in a framework of policies and principles that enables practical cooperation, while maintaining and enhancing Australia's sovereignty. Sovereignty is at the heart of national security and Australia's way of life. Protecting this will always be the first priority of the Albanese government. I thank the House. 12:19 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning Let me begin by saying that the opposition shares the minister's view that our sovereignty, our territory, our values and our way of life are a sacred duty of the Australian government and, indeed, of this parliament. On this question, the coalition are of one mind and spirit with the government, for if we cannot secure and defend ourselves we have failed at the most basic duty entrusted to us by the Australian people. In this task, strength and resolve are vital. We must be strong because weakness is provocative. We must show resolve because we live in a contested, competitive world. Our national history reminds us of these truths. Australia has been tempered by war in the last century. More than 100,000 men and women have given their lives in war defending the things that we love and cherish. Indeed, many of us stood at the War Memorial on Sunday at the Last Post Ceremony and said as one, 'Lest we forget.' In speaking those words we pledged to remember the sacrifice made by previous generations, but we also pledged to strengthen and defend Australia today and for the generations to come. The opposition embraces this obligation, and we will always work with the government in a spirit of goodwill to provide for the safety and security of the Australian people. Our decisions on national security reflect our priorities. They show our strength and resolve. That's why the former coalition government embarked on a new course through the AUKUS partnership on 16 September 2021. AUKUS is a new partnership that will build our military strength through the acquisition of nuclear submarines and other advanced defence capabilities. This task will span multiple parliaments, multiple governments and multiple generations of Australians. It requires leadership from government and institutional support from this parliament, for this is a truly complex and demanding nation-building project that engages government, business, industry, our schools and universities, our workers, our allies and our regional neighbours. Most importantly, this task demands resolve, for we do live in a contested and competitive world. There are naysayers and opponents of AUKUS here in Australia and abroad. They will counsel doubt, delay and deferral. We must ignore them and stay the course. Delivering nuclear boats to the Royal Australian Navy on time demands singular focus and resolve. It demands relentless mission focus, not just from government but from all of us in this House. The opposition believes in the AUKUS mission, and we are resolved to see it through to completion at best speed with the most capable nuclear submarine that we can get. This must be our priority, as time is not on our side. Our strategic circumstances have changed for the worse, as the minister has outlined today. The past 12 months have added urgency to the AUKUS mission. A little more than a year ago we saw China and Russia sign a no-limits strategic partnership on the eve of the Beijing Winter Olympics. Only weeks later, Russia commenced the barbaric, illegal and unjustified invasion of Ukraine. Thousands have perished since, and, despite our best efforts to support the Ukrainian people in their struggle against barbarism, Europe remains no closer to peace today. Nearer to home we have witnessed a creeping strategic disorder over the past six months. Rockets from the People's Republic of China streaked across the skies of Taiwan in August, and PRC spy balloons breached sovereign airspace in the United States and Central America. Authoritarian powers are on the move, and the rules based global order has groaned under the strain. The risk of miscalculation has risen to dangerous levels. A new reality is darkening our region, one that has the potential to diminish our collective security and prosperity. This emerging reality was forecast by the former coalition government in July 2020, when the Defence Strategic Update was given at the Australian Defence Force Academy by Prime Minister Morrison. Great power competition, military modernisation and grey-zone operations conducted below the threshold of war—they were all forecast in the DSU in 2020, and even then, authoritarian powers were on the move. It was this assessment that led the former coalition government to act, to see the world as it was, not as we wished it to be. It meant that we had to take a tough but necessary decision: to cease the Attack class project with our French friends and to pursue a new trilateral agreement with the US and the UK that would deliver the most capable cutting-edge nuclear submarine. This was not easy, but tough decisions never are. The Leader of the Opposition knows this better than most in this House, and I acknowledge his leadership as a former minister for defence. The coalition acted in the best interests of the Australian people because we believe that national defence is a sacred duty of government. We can't afford to be weak in this new reality, and nuclear submarines will make us strong. It will change the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific region in favour of those who want peace, security, stability and prosperity, of those who want a bright future for Australia, for children and for our neighbours in the region. But relying on submarines is not enough. Even as we build our strength through AUKUS, we must redouble our frontline diplomatic efforts, as the minister said. We must build our friendships to reduce tension and create pathways for peace. We are blessed to live in a colourful, dynamic region of many countries and cultures. Modern Australia reflects this regional diversity with our multicultural society. This is a strength as we step out into our Indo-Pacific neighbourhood. We understand and respect differences as we encounter them. Our neighbours are important to us, friends such as Japan, Singapore, New Zealand, South Korea, India, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia, among many others. We benefit from their strategic insights and perspectives and uphold their sovereignty with the same zeal that we wish to safeguard our own. But we all share the same desire for a brighter future. On that common ground, we must work together to avoid conflict, disorder and strife with all nations in our region, sometimes with outstretched arms towards those who wish to remain aloof. We must stay engaged, and we must maintain a bias for dialogue. The minister touched upon our alliance with the United States. He mentioned our joint facilities and covered the perennial questions of full knowledge and concurrence. I will not cover the same ground, except to say that there is no space between the government and the coalition on the critical importance of those capabilities to our national security, nor on the need to maintain them for the challenges ahead. I have a few words in closing about our closest security partner, the United States of America. The Indo-Pacific region has benefited greatly from the US since the Second World War. On a personal level, I wouldn't be standing at this table if a US medic from Virginia had not saved the life of my grandfather under fire in the Indonesian archipelago on 31 March 1945. On a national and geopolitical level, US investment in regional security and trade has helped to build peace our common peace and prosperity for more than 80 years, and, as a trading nation, our lives depend upon it. We wish to see this continue, as do other nations. We urge our American friends to retain an outward-facing posture to stay engaged in the region and to be responsive to the needs of allies, particularly when it comes to the liberalisation of defence and technology transfer. The US Congress, the UK parliament and the Australian parliament must work together to realise the host of legislative changes that will enable the smooth operation of AUKUS beyond the respective governments of the day. This might require institutional experimentation, and I encourage the minister to consider all options going forward. In closing, we look forward to the next steps with AUKUS and the Defence Strategic Review announcements. We will offer robust support from the opposition, with the national interest as our guiding star in the best Westminster tradition. I thank the House. MOTIONS 508 MOTIONS Parliamentary Standards 508 Report from Federation Chamber 508 MOTIONS 509 MOTIONS National Apology to Victims and Survivors of Institutional Child Sexual Abuse 509 Report from Federation Chamber 509 BILLS 509 BILLS Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022 509

Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022

Report from Federation Chamber 509 Third Reading 509 12:30 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. COMMITTEES 509 COMMITTEES National Anti-Corruption Commission Legislation Joint Select Committee 509 Membership 509 12:30 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin by leave—I move: That Mr Burns, Ms Murphy and Mr Zappia be appointed members of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on National Anti-Corruption Commission. Question agreed to. Economics Committee 509 Report 509 12:31 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser On behalf of the Standing Committee on Economics, I present the committee's report entitled Review of the Reserve Bank of Australia annual report 2021, together with the minutes of proceedings. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Dr MULINO 132880 by leave—The Australian economy is experiencing challenging conditions. Over the past year or more a number of global factors have contributed to an environment of rising global inflation. Australia, along with all major economies, has been affected by this. I know from speaking to many people in my electorate that individuals and families are feeling cost-of-living pressures. It is timely that the House Standing Committee on Economics Review of the Reserve Bank of Australia annual report 2021be tabled at this time. Over the past 12 months, Australia has experienced rising inflation and, in turn, rising interest rates. This is affecting household budgets. The government has responded with a range of targeted measures, including an increase in the minimum wage, cheaper medicines and more affordable child care. Today I would like to focus on monetary policy over the period covered by this report. In setting the context of the current situation, the RBA governor identified that the macroeconomic challenges and uncertainties for Australia largely originated in the global economy. These included rising inflation and a risk of economic slowdown in major economies, including the US, the EU and the UK; continued risks surrounding production levels and supply chains in China; and the consequences on global food and energy prices of the ongoing illegal war in Ukraine. One of the policy issues the committee explored was the RBA's conduct of monetary policy. In particular, at the time of the publication of this report, there had been a number of interest rate rises since May 2022. The committee asked the RBA how, when considering further rises, the bank took into account the fact that the rate rises would take time to work through the economy. The RBA acknowledged that there could be considerable lag before interest rate rises had their full impact on economic activity, and that this factored into the decision-making. The committee also explored aspects of past monetary policy implementation, including forward guidance and yield curve control. In both cases, the RBA acknowledged that it would have done things differently with the full benefit of hindsight. Based in part on reviews that the RBA has undertaken, the RBA has identified a number of lessons to be learnt from that episode. The committee explored the inflationary pressures being experienced by the economy. The RBA agreed that inflationary pressures are a combination of demand-side and supply-side factors. The committee noted this and is keen that the RBA continue to take into account, when making decisions around rates, that supply and demand side pressures affect the economy differently. Another aspect of monetary policy is that the interest rate rises that we are experiencing affect groups of people differently when responding to demand-side pressures. The committee expects the RBA will continue to analyse the distributional determinants from which demand-driven inflation is emanating, and that this be reflected in interest rate decisions. The committee also explored the interplay between fiscal and monetary policy—in other words, whether the decisions of the RBA and the government are supporting each other's goals. The RBA agreed it was important that fiscal and monetary policy work together. The governor was asked about the government's current fiscal settings, and he indicated that the bank was comfortable with them, in terms of their inflationary impact, and that he did not expect that spending priorities would put upward pressure on interest rates. In summary, our economy has experienced rising inflation over the last 12 months. The independent RBA has responded to this with a sequence of interest rate rises. The House Standing Committee on Economics continues to monitor the conduct of monetary policy, given its impact on members of the community, and the important role that the RBA and its monetary policy conduct plays in broader economic management. 12:35 Mr HAMILTON 291387 Groom by leave—I'd like to begin by commending the chair on his fine efforts in leading this most important of committees. It has never been a more important time for this committee to do its work of holding the RBA to account; in fact, I think it was back in 2007 when the House economics committee last oversaw such a rapid change in monetary policy. I'd like to thank committee members for the collegiate way they have addressed things, and, most importantly, thank the secretariat for helping us through things; we're a rather young committee with such an important role. I thank them for their fine work. I will make one personal comment. The chair and I have made extensive efforts to have an open conversation about the importance of keeping the focus on the RBA's work here. There has never been a more important time for us to do that, and I'm very grateful that he has engaged in the way that he has. Thank you, Member for Fraser. I will note very quickly that, in reading the report, the report feels very dated given it's only three months old. That's because so much change has happened in the economy during that time. It's very interesting to read the governor's comments at the time, saying that the outlook was uncertain but positive. That is very reflective, but I'm not sure we'd make the same statement now. That shows how much change was happening during the decision-making of the RBA at that time. We must remember household spending was still very strong but, very interestingly, consumer confidence was quite weak. It was a unique situation. Anecdotally, many of us will have looked back over the summer period and seen that high spending continuing on as savings that had been accumulated during the pandemic dwindled. I am reflecting there that there is not an end to the change we're going through; we'll probably see this focus continue, no doubt, in the next meeting with the governor of the RBA. One of the points I will take up—and the chair has done an excellent job of summarising the report—is that we went into a prolonged discussion, and have since carried that on, around the forward guidance provided by the RBA governor that has become the subject of significant media scrutiny since. It's important that we delved into that and it's important that we hold the RBA to account on future statements they make, particularly because these are statements that impact households, aspirational Australians, mums and dads and young people right across the economy; they make decisions based upon these statements. It's crucial we make clear to the RBA who is impacted by these statements. Going forward, that's something that will be a continued theme of our investigations. I follow up with this last point that was very well raised, around the convergence of fiscal and monetary policy. The governor made a statement about those two working very well together during the pandemic period in terms of achieving a set outcome. It's important for us to continue a focus on that, particularly in keeping an eye on potential future fiscal expansion and what that would mean. As the chair pointed out, the governor was comfortable with where things are. I'd like him to remain comfortable; that's the best way possible for us to alleviate those inflationary pressures on households we're observing. To go back to the start, I thank the chair and the committee very much for their hard work, and I thank the secretariat. 12:39 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I'd like to reiterate with my thanks to the deputy chair, the member for Groom and other members of the committee who are here. It has been a very collegial and well-functioning committee. I move: That the House take note of the report. Debate adjourned. Reference to Federation Chamber 511 12:40 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I move: That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate. Question agreed to. GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH 511 GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH Address-in-Reply 511 12:40 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth I wish to start by thanking the Governor-General for his remarks upon the opening of the 47th Parliament last year. His Excellency highlighted the fact that 'in hard times, Australians have been at their caring and courageous best'. We saw that over the summer when Australians were getting out there and helping one another in the floods across this country as they were dealing with natural disasters. Indeed, the member from Forrest has also just highlighted—and I want to attach myself to her remarks—the courageous work that we have seen from those in her electorate in the south-west of WA who have been fighting fires. I thank our emergency services professionals and volunteers and, equally, those who came not just from across WA but from across this nation to ensure that we did everything we could to help communities around Fitzroy Crossing in the Kimberley that were affected by 15-metre-high floodwaters. It is something we had not seen before and something from which we know it will take many years to rebuild the community and other infrastructure that has been damaged. Again, as His Excellency said: In hard times, Australians have been at their caring and courageous best. Sadly, we see the reminders of that during particularly awful natural disasters. What we have seen over the last three years is Australians showing great strength and resilience. Our new parliament has given Australia a fresh start to come out the other side—a new opportunity to talk about the future of our nation, to show our love for this great country we call Australia and to talk afresh about what we can achieve together. As His Excellency said, this government will seek to lead by example. We will seek to lead by example in who we choose to send to this place, and you see the diversity of thought, skills, experience and background in the caucus that makes up the Albanese Labor government. We are leading by example through our open consultation with Australian industry, looking at new ways to work together to get things done. We've seen that in the parliament this week with the progression of the paid parental leave expansion, an idea that came from working together across industry, unions and the community sector as a result of the Jobs and Skills Summit that was held here in September last year. I also thank His Excellency for noting that the role of the Climate Change Authority would be restored, and it has been. That was one of the first acts of the 47th Parliament, because we know that Australia's standing in the world is enhanced when we are seen to take action on climate change and when we do our bit on the big challenges that face not just our country and not just our communities but communities across the world. I also note His Excellency mentioned our commitment to the voice to parliament. This is a commitment to build a better future for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It will be a better future for all of us and this is an opportunity for every Australian—not just the 151 people who serve as representatives in this place but all 17.2 million Australians—to have their say on writing the next chapter of our Constitution and on writing a shared future for Australia through both constitutional recognition and having a voice that can speak, in all its diversity, to this parliament and to the executive to make sure that we improve the quality of policy design. We also had His Excellency highlight the economic policies of the Albanese government—policies that 'will promote economic growth that creates opportunities for Australians' and will 'steer Australia safely through' the issues we are facing. I think that is worth recognising as well. It's an honour to be part of this parliament and part of this government, and to see the changes that have started in this place. I was recently reading Senator Margaret Reynolds's valedictory address from 1999, where she remarked how diverse and enlivened the Senate had become over her career from the 1980s to the 1990s. If you look at the parliament now, in 2022 and 2023, we have the most women in history in both chambers: 43 in the Senate and 58 in the House. There is more work to be done, but it's an absolute step change compared to how things were, even when Margaret Reynolds was talking about the changes that had been made back in 1999. We have 11 First Nations members of parliament. We have so many different faiths and backgrounds being represented in this place. It is always a joy, a privilege and an honour to work in this place, but I feel that that joy, privilege and honour only deepen as we expand the breadth of this parliament to ensure it looks as much as possible like the Australia we represent. It's a sign of the fairer Australia that we all seek to build, and it gives us the opportunity to make sure that we have all of the policy ideas necessary to deliver the big, lasting change we need. We are determined not to waste this opportunity. We are determined to be a government that seeks to unite Australians, not divide them, while recognising we have an important role in this place to debate things, to thoroughly examine them and to make sure that all views are considered when we make decisions. When it comes to the capacity of this parliament to make good decisions, one of the most fundamental things that we need is to have all the information available. One of the things that was such a surprising start to this parliamentary term was that we learnt of the absolute lack of transparency that existed under the former government, when the member for Cook briefed some journalists about the secret ministries which had started in and expanded across the Morrison government, breaking faith with the Australian people, breaking faith with the parliament of Australia and breaking faith with the conventions of the Westminster system within which we all operate. This side of the House, this government, will seek to uphold and protect the conventions of parliament. We are doing that with the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, which is before the parliament at the moment, to make sure that never again can any Prime Minister swear themselves into one, two, three, four or five secret ministries. That was a deception of the Australian people. It also undermined not just faith in democracy but our Australian Public Service. We did what you would expect when we learnt in an otherwise very good book—a very revealing book—about these secret ministries that had proliferated across government. We did the right thing. We asked former justice Virginia Bell AC to inquire into it, we sought advice from the Solicitor-General and we put legislation to this parliament to act upon it. While I'm talking about ministries, obviously the member for Cook was a Treasurer, not that any of us knew it at the time—not even Treasurer Frydenberg knew it at the time—but maybe it does mean that the trillion dollars of debt that former Treasurer Frydenberg left should only be— Mr Joyce e5d There wasn't a trillion dollars of debt. Mr GORMAN 74519 There was a trillion dollars of debt. Okay, I'll be generous: I'll allocate $500 billion of debt to the member for Cook and $500 billion of debt to someone who, I understand, may become the new member for Aston. We have seen in reports today that we might have a member of the shadow executive walking out the door and being replaced by former Treasurer Frydenberg. The former member who gave Australians a trillion dollars of debt is now going to come back to finish the job. Will he try to add an extra trillion dollars of debt? Mr e5d Mr Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order: that's misleading the House. There was not a trillion dollars of debt then, and there's not now. He can't say things that are not right. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Member for Perth, will you correct your reference? Mr GORMAN 74519 I don't know, maybe there are some sensitivities amongst the coalition parties about the idea that the former member for Kooyong might return to this place. However much he spent, we definitely know billions of dollars were wasted in JobKeeper through poor policy design. That's the talent that is being brought back into this place. Indeed, the former member for Kooyong, who may be the new member for Aston, has the record as the highest taxing Treasurer in Australian history. I note that when I say 'highest taxing treasure in Australian history' I am not being pulled up on accuracy, because it is a fact. The other thing we as a government have sought to do, in dealing with the decade of inaction presided over by those opposite, is make sure that we once again look to the future on the important work of acting upon climate change. Embracing the transition to clean energy and the opportunities in front of Australia brings with it 600,000 jobs. We know that those jobs are good, well-paying, secure jobs, jobs that have a very bright future, and we should be looking to do everything we can to encourage those jobs to come here to Australia as we seek to be the renewable energy superpower that will not just power Australia and Australian industry into the future but also help provide the energy and resources of the future for our neighbours and friends abroad. Australia has always had a proud history of being an energy exporter. That is a history we embrace. It is our present role in helping many of our friends and allies around the world with their energy security needs, and if we want to make sure that we can continue to do that for many, many decades to come, we need to be serious about embracing action on climate change and about embracing the opportunities presented through further expansion of our critical minerals industries. We also saw a change in how we develop policy in this place, when it came to the climate change bill. We saw a government that was happy to take sensible suggestions from other parts of the parliament to improve the legislation in front of us. The Australian people expect us to work together to make sure that we do grab good ideas from wherever they should come. It was pleasing to see that legislation become law last year. After some productive work, I note that we now have the coalition that designed the safeguard mechanism refusing to implement policies they previously supported to help act on climate change. These are policies that have been developed in partnership with industry, after talking to industry about what they need, about how we make sure that we work together to reduce emissions while supporting Australian jobs and Australian industry. That's what this legislation is all about. But in an interesting change from the party that for many years did not support net zero by 2050 under the former Deputy Prime Minister—I commend him for shifting the coalition along towards the proposition of net zero by 2050—now in opposition they are backtracking from all of those commitments by trying to block action on the safeguard mechanism. When it comes to making sure that Australians have a reliable, clean, secure energy supply, we need to make sure we are putting in place the good, long-term measures that will ensure energy security and job security for all. So I urge those on the opposition benches to do everything they can to work with us to deliver those sensible improvements to their safeguard mechanism. When it comes to the question of walking together and looking at how you can find the big shifts in policy that will help support the future of this country and make sure we do walk as one, there is no simpler proposition than that put forward by the authors of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, the statement that was written in 2017, handed in generosity to the previous parliament, handed in generosity to the previous government, and that seeks to find a way to work together. It was based on feedback from Prime Ministers Abbott and Turnbull about what was needed, about what was the sensible Constitutional amendment that would enable us to do recognition and respect and to work with the First Nations of this country. This is a huge opportunity. I welcome the fact there is ongoing dialogue between ministers and shadow ministers to ensure we get the referendum machinery provisions right. I welcome the fact the Leader of the Opposition has met with the referendum working group. I welcome the fact we have open hearts across this parliament to try and find a way to, after 122 years, properly recognise the First Australians in our Constitution. This is beyond party politics. It's beyond individual members of parliament. It is something for 17.2 million Australians to have their say on. It's something that has been worked on in one form or another for 15 years. In the words of the Prime Minister, released more than six months ago at the Garma Festival, there is a basis for every member of this place to have a say on what that constitutional amendment would look like, and once we've had our say it's then over to the Australian people to have their say. I echo the words the Prime Minister said about this question on the first day of the 47th Parliament: 'You can either have a source of pride or a source of regret.' We look to next Monday, which is the 15th anniversary of the apology to the stolen generation. That was a moment of immense pride not just for this parliament but for this nation. We have an opportunity this year to put another moment of immense pride for our people into our national history books and write a brighter future for all Australians. We find ourselves inheriting not just a trillion dollars of debt but the interest rate rises that began under the coalition. We had interest rate rises start under the coalition. We had a trillion dollars of debt racked up by former Treasurer Frydenberg. And, on top of that, we enter the choppy waters that come with the emergence of China from COVID restrictions and the changes that come to our energy markets as a result of Russia's illegal and immoral war in Ukraine. And we have to work with our partners on the increasingly challenging strategic environment in which we find ourselves, as the Deputy Prime Minister so ably outlined in his remarks to the House. It is why we need a government that has policies focused on spending that creates growth, making sure every dollar is spent effectively and every dollar we spend has an economic benefit to the people of Australia—doing things like boosting participation and lifting productivity, doing what we can to increase wages and ensuring that people get those secure, well-paid jobs that enable them to further invest into our economy. That's why we are so committed to our National Reconstruction Fund, because we know that will give us the next base of manufacturing, the next base of Australian industry, and make sure we grab those opportunities for our sovereign manufacturing capability. Just two years ago we had the biggest wake-up call any island nation could have—that we do not have as much capability here as we need to supply the things we need for ourselves. We are seeking to act by bringing in our National Reconstruction Fund. Again, I urge those opposite to back this in. If I look to my community and what we continue to do, I have been pleased to work with the now minister for immigration and citizenship in a previous capacity on the ideas that would help improve and strengthen the Perth City Deal—a deal which is a partnership between the federal government, the state government and the City of Perth. We will continue to re-energise this deal, that $1.5 billion of investment, to make sure we have the universities we need in the heart of the CBD. The vertical campus by the Edith Cowan University is looking very exciting. Edith Cowan is a great university. It's in my electorate and in your electorate, Deputy Speaker Goodenough; the leadership of Edith Cowan chose very well as to where they placed their campuses, and I think that's something we can both celebrate. Equally, I think something that can bring us together is the work happening on the Aboriginal Cultural Centre, with a $50 million investment from the Albanese government and a $50 million investment from the McGowan government, making sure we have that great new cultural institution in the heart of the CBD to help with truth-telling and to help with sharing the great history and cultures of this land. It's a tourism asset. I always say that if we get this right it'll rival the Sydney Opera House for its architectural brilliance, its tourism potential and the statement it makes, not just to all Australians but to the world, about our determination to work together for a brighter, fairer future. In closing, I want to say that the other piece of infrastructure that will continue under this government—and I note that Prime Minister Albanese was the first minister ever to back this project—is the Metronet project rolling out across Western Australia. I had the joy of riding with the Prime Minister on the Forrestfield Airport Link connecting Bayswater and Perth to the airport. For the first time, people can catch a train in Perth to the airport. It's a welcome addition, and there's so much more to be built. (Time expired) 13:00 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt I rise to speak in this address-in-reply debate and firstly note that when the motion was moved it was of course to the Governor-General representing Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, and in the intervening period of time this address is to the Governor-General representing King Charles III. Again, as I did in the condolence debate, I acknowledge the passing of Her Majesty and the remarkable service she gave to the entire Commonwealth, particularly to the Commonwealth of Australia. I want to start by thanking the people of Sturt for placing their trust in me to serve for a second term in this parliament. It is the greatest of honours that we all share—the distinction of representing our communities in the federal parliament. I know we all hold the same view as to what an honour it is and how lucky we are to be here, and I certainly continue to cherish every moment I have here in this chamber, to participate in the important work we do, and just as much—if not more so—continuing to be in my community all the time, working with so many people to help them with the issues and concerns they have. We of course at times deal with people in some of their most vulnerable states, and they need their local democratically elected representatives to help them with challenges from a variety of issues. Sometimes there are things they need from the federal government, and the government at times can do better in the way in which we support and look after people, also hearing the issues they have more generally. It certainly informs the perspective that we have in coming to this chamber and contributing to the debates we have and the decisions we make. So, my deepest thanks and appreciation go to the people of Sturt, in the eastern and north-eastern suburbs of South Australia. I hope to live up to the very high standard of representing you again for the next three years—or 2½ years, as it is now. Equally, this is an opportunity to talk about the election campaign. I want to thank all the unbelievable volunteers who contributed so much to my campaign for re-election—all the staff in my office, all the members of my FEC and the many volunteers beyond Liberal Party members who helped and contributed in the campaign. We are at least the equal greatest and most vibrant democracy on the planet here in Australia, and election campaigns remind us of that. Of course, when we are out there doorknocking, phone canvassing, holding our supermarket stalls, meeting with people, attending events and in a campaign, all of that goes on to top volume. And there is a whole range of other things in the heat of the campaign—debating other candidates, participating in the great contest of ideas. I acknowledge all the other candidates who contested the seat of Sturt. We had 11. A couple of colleagues have mentioned that they came close to that or that they too had 11 candidates. That's a great thing. We welcome as many people as want to contest in their local electorates. So, to the other 10 candidates who contested the state of Sturt, thank you very much for putting your hand up and wanting to represent your community and making sure there were many options for the people of Sturt to consider. Having more candidates helps to make sure that there are more ideas about both our local community and how we run our nation, and that's an excellent thing. To my team, I really appreciate the sacrifices and the work done by staff, party members and volunteers and the team in the Liberal Party campaign headquarters. Andrew Hirst is the campaign director. The member for Cook, former prime minister Morrison, was our party leader. Party leaders do an enormous amount in election campaigns. I have seen up close leaders of parties in campaigns and the hectic schedules that the campaign directors and all the senior ministers had. I thank them so much for the enormous effort they put into contesting elections, and it should be acknowledged. At a local level, we made some important commitments that a re-elected government would have delivered. I was very proud of those being things that were very worthy, locally developed ideas that were brought to us and that we made commitments to support, particularly those from the local governments in my electorate. I always find local government really do an excellent job in my area of identifying really worthy projects that they are prepared to invest in themselves. But, of course, they can only do so much within their budget envelope, and there are always opportunities for us to partner with local government, so we made a series of announcements during the campaign that we would have committed to. Some of those are ongoing, despite the fact that we were not re-elected, because they were committed to before the caretaker period. In particular, the new government has reconfirmed—and I will certainly be holding them to this—that the allocation of funds to the Parkinson Oval redevelopment at the Kensington Gardens Reserve that was in the pre-election fiscal outlook will be proceeding. That's a vital co-investment between the Commonwealth, the state government—which had already committed funds and, in fact, surprisingly deposited them in their bank account before we had finalised our commitment—and the local council. Three levels of government are committing to that $8½ million redevelopment, and it has been indicated that that will still proceed because it was in the pre-election fiscal outlook document. I am pleased about that. I am disappointed that other commitments that I made won't be proceeded with—in particular, the Campbelltown Urban Village. The Campbelltown Council will attempt to proceed with that without federal funds, and I hope that they can. If they can, they will have to use more of their own resources, and that just means other things they could have done with those funds won't occur in our community, so that's disappointing. A project that I am very passionate about is investing in the River Torrens Linear Park precinct throughout the city of Adelaide. This is something that doesn't only benefit my electorate of Sturt but absolutely benefits every riparian electorate and every community along the Torrens, which is from the beach right up to the source of the Torrens in the hills. I am still committed to making sure that we are delivering an investment in that very important piece of environmental investment that also has very significant recreational outcomes. Most major cities in this country were colonised on a river. The Torrens, as everyone would know, is the river that runs through Adelaide, from the Adelaide Hills, through the eastern and north-eastern suburbs of my electorate, through the city and down to the beach. We didn't always have the highest of standards in the early days of urban development throughout that catchment. The project that I was able to secure a commitment towards—it would be, again, a partnership between state and local government—involves us investing in both environmental projects and recreational enhancements throughout the entirety of what we call Linear Park, which is either side of the River Torrens. Linear Park runs all the way from the beach, through my electorate, into the Adelaide Hills. Linear Park and the River Torrens are really one and the same thing, and there are opportunities to improve, from an environmental point of view, that corridor and, more broadly, the Torrens catchment. There are equally opportunities for us to have higher standards and more consistent recreational investment throughout that corridor—with things like better and wider paths so we can share those tracks across a variety of recreational pursuits; more, better and safer public toilets; and lighting, from a safety point of view. There are a whole range of things that are opportunities if we invest in that. I'm going to keep very much focused on that throughout this term, and I hope to take a similar commitment to the next election. Another very important issue of focus for me locally is bushfire preparedness. We had a bushfire on the cusp of my electorate only a couple of weeks ago, in Montacute. Some residents in my electorate had to evacuate their homes. It's a really significant reminder that we have to be ever vigilant to the risk of bushfire. We need to be prepared, and I want to make sure I'm doing a lot within my community to keep that awareness as heightened as it needs to be in the suburbs where people must have a bushfire plan, must know what to do when a risk develops that may mean that they have to leave their property. People must also make sure that their property is in the best condition it can be in, to assist our heroic firefighters and volunteers where there is a risk. We must make sure we keep fuel loads low, make sure people have got their bushfire plans et cetera and make sure that the resources are there for our local Country Fire Service brigades and the other emergency services that engage in protecting our community from the very real risk and threat of bushfires. Next week is the 40th anniversary of the Ash Wednesday fire, which was a devastating bushfire in the Adelaide Hills that traversed the electorate of Mayo and came into my electorate of Sturt. That's a good reminder to all of us of the need for bushfire preparedness. The other important issue is local recycling and making sure that we keep a very high awareness of it in households and businesses in my electorate and across the nation—but I can do my bit locally. We need to make sure people understand how they can maximise recycling in the household, in particular. Of course, we work with local government, who have responsibility for waste collection, and East Waste, who are the alliance, predominantly, in my electorate that do waste collection. I had the privilege to attend, on behalf of then Minister Ley, the opening of a major recycling facility in suburban Adelaide in late 2021. It was a great example of government investment in increasing and enhancing our capacity to recycle. I'm very passionate about improving even further the amount of recycling that we do and trying to reduce as much as possible what goes to landfill and increase as much as possible what we can re-use, and using that circular economy principle as broadly as possible. Those are three very important things locally in my electorate. The other thing that is extremely important to my electorate, and to the whole state of South Australia, is the full implementation of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. There was a terrible mistake when the Australian Constitution was ultimately finalised and adopted, and that was that the Commonwealth did not have power over interstate waterways, and it absolutely should. I'd love to see, in my lifetime, the Constitution amended so that the Commonwealth has power over interstate waterways, because obviously water resources flow from one state to another, and one of the great advantages of our Commonwealth government is that we are in the best position of anyone to manage competing interests. Nonetheless, the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is something we should all be very proud of. It addresses the deficiency in our Constitution whereby the Commonwealth does not have responsibility for interstate waterways and, through the agreement of those that do—the constituent states and the ACT area within the Murray-Darling Basin—it creates a Commonwealth-supported funded entity, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, develops the plan and is implementing it. It's something to be proud of. A lot of people around the world look at it and ask, 'How have you done this as well as you have?' There are parts of the world that struggle with this. Even though we have our challenges, most look to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority and the Murray-Darling Basin Plan as examples of world's best practice in managing the challenges of securing the water that is absolutely necessary for the environmental sustainability and health of the Murray-Darling Basin against the obvious competing interests of human sustainment and economic use. This is a problem for watercourses around the world. Hopefully, fully implementing the plan is something that we will achieve and get right. The now government made a big deal about this in my home state of South Australia, that they would be implementing the plan on time and in full. I expect them to honour that promise, and I intend to be part of holding them accountable for that. The plan basically involved looking at all the water that was being diverted out of the system—the baseline diversions—then taking a science based approach to determining a sustainable amount of water that could come out of the system. The gap between the baseline and the sustainable amount is the water that has to be recovered: the 3,200 gigalitres of water. Everything the now government needed to know about the plan's status and the requirements for its full implementation was well known during the campaign, when they made the commitments they made. I wish them well in honouring that promise and keeping that commitment. It is going to be a challenge. There are competing interests. I hope we do not descend into battles about who is more worthy of this scarce resource. We all understand that there's a challenge in competing interests, but the commitment was made, and it's very important to South Australia. No excuses will be acceptable for not implementing the plan on time. I make these comments at a time when we have flooding through the Murray-Darling Basin system, and the last thing on people's minds is scarcity of water in the basin. But people in the basin know full well that, whilst we are having floods right now, and we always hope to have consistently excellent rainfall, there are going to be droughts and tough times for the basin. The point of the plan was to make sure that, once it's fully implemented—by 30 June 2024; less than 18 months from now—regardless of where in the cycle we are between heavy rain and drought, we have a long-term plan to sustainably manage the basin. That's why it absolutely must be implemented. In the last few months in particular, in my community, as in every other community in this country, the most consistent thing people are raising is cost-of-living pressures. We are in a cycle of significant wealth reduction in our economy right now, which is absolutely terrible. We have people whose home value is decreasing while their mortgage repayments are going up and their real wages are decreasing. The current rate of real wage reduction is really frightening. It's at a level that I've never seen in my adult life. Inflation is running at 7.8 per cent and wages growth is at 3.1 per cent, so people are really going backwards out there. It is really, really tough. I urge everyone in this chamber, particularly the government, to prioritise the really tough times that people are going through at the moment. Whilst they have an agenda to implement from the election and a whole range of other things that they seem to be choosing to focus on, cost of living is clearly not one of them at the moment, but it needs to be. I implore the government to understand the pain that people are feeling out there. Prioritise that. There are all the other competing things that you could spend your time on as a government, but the thing that people need is relief from this cycle of wealth destruction that they are going through. It is really tough, and we need this to be a priority of the government so that people's wages aren't going backwards and their mortgages aren't spiralling out of control while their home values also deplete. With that, thank you again to the people of Sturt for sending me back here for another term. I commend the address to the House. Debate adjourned. Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an order of the day for a later hour. BILLS 517 BILLS Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 517

Higher Education Support Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022

Consideration of Senate Message 517 13:21 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I move: That the amendments be agreed to. Question agreed to. Migration Amendment (Aggregate Sentences) Bill 2023 517

Migration Amendment (Aggregate Sentences) Bill 2023

First Reading 517 GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH 517 GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH Address-In-Reply 517 13:23 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell I want to begin by thanking the people of my electorate, the electorate of Calwell, for re-electing me as their representative in the 47th Parliament. It's a great privilege, and I'm sure other colleagues would feel exactly the same. It's a great privilege to serve in this House, and I will continue to work each and every day to put our community's interests and needs firmly on the national agenda. We have a Labor government because in times of change as well as in times of crisis people come to rely on the role of government, and we as a party actually believe in governing in the interests of our constituencies and the broader Australian community. We put forward a plan that speaks to and delivers on the needs of ordinary Australians, and they are largely the people of my electorate of Calwell. We put forward a plan that appeals to our sense of optimism and hope, and, in Prime Minister Albanese, we put forward someone who leads a government that has set the policy framework for a better future. In thanking the people of Calwell, I want to also thank the many volunteers who helped in my campaign. There is a lot of work that goes into these campaigns, and I'm grateful for the support of each and every person, each and every volunteer, and all those who have helped contribute to my re-election. I'm grateful and heartened by their generous support and by their solidarity. I will work hard not to let them down, and I will work hard to ensure that their interests are paramount in my work throughout the 47th parliament. One of the key areas that I will focus on will be supporting the government's agenda of reviving our proud manufacturing history as a model for the future. My electorate of Calwell is the heart of Australian manufacturing, and we must make sure that that heart beats into the future. I use the word 'heart' purposely, because we cannot secure our supply chains and economic security if we don't have a strong manufacturing base that pumps life into the industries of today and those we wish to energise and sustain into the future. The minister for industry will, himself, understand this all too well in terms of our own corresponding electorates and the concentration of manufacturing businesses and what it means for our communities and their impact on this nation's future. A future made in Australia means that we must make things locally; we must make them here. It means that we invest in the skills and workforce that allow us not only to put forward our agenda but to secure it well into the future, so that industries are secured, so that supply chains are revived, so that families can once again have the job security that has allowed so many people in my electorate to build a life for themselves and for their families and so that we can secure our nation's economic security through a sovereign capability that can help our economy become crisis-proof. If there was ever a time when we moved from the theoretical to the stark reality that nearly a decade of neglect has caused, it was during COVID and its shocks to the global economy. It demonstrated to us that we can only secure our place in the regional and global economy through a future industrial base that is diverse, includes a high-tech manufacturing capability and is made in Australia. Securing our place means investing in the green tech boom, not as an ideological inclination but very much in the way of transforming our economy to meet changing global market conditions, technologies and business models. Securing ourselves against international competitors and overseas dumping measures means investing in local resources and local industry through a real commitment to our domestic manufacturing capabilities. I've spoken in this parliament many times on how the Ford factory in my electorate that shut shop in 2016 was more than just an icon of Australian car manufacturing. It was a major employer of thousands of postwar European migrants who came here under the Arthur Calwell migration program. Jobs were key to establishing the basis of a new life in a faraway country. Australia needed their labour in order to grow, and these migrants needed hope for a better life for themselves and their families. On the assembly lines and factory floors, they not only built cars but forged stories of mateship and camaraderie and built suburbs and communities around them. Factories formed an integral part of entire suburbs and streets that brought cultures and faiths together and rose to build contemporary multicultural Australia. These workers were embraced by the Labor Party and the union movement, which collectively defended their rights and aided their integration into the Australian community—a community that they shaped and changed. I've also said that these migrants didn't just make 'Australian-made'; they in fact made Australia. This is why, with my focus on Australian manufacturing, jobs and the diverse communities that make up my electorate, I value the opportunity that I have been given to chair the Joint Standing Committee on Migration and to also chair the Human Rights Subcommittee in this parliament. These are areas I have long championed and look forward to making a strong contribution to in this 47th parliament. Migration and human rights speak to two key areas I'm most passionate about: What do we want our modern Australia to be? And what do we want Australia's place in the world to be? These two issues also speak to the refugees and migrants in my electorate of Calwell. We don't want to see the entrenchment of a two-class system in Australia—whether that be a migration system based on guest workers, masked as skilled migration and open to exploitation, or a migration system based on people living here in Australia, lingering indefinitely and cruelly, on protection visas. Our government's commitment to abolishing temporary protection visas marks a fundamental shift towards hope and common sense and away from the previous government's approach that discredited us as a country and denied our sense of community. I'm proud to be part of a government that will restore humanity to those long denied it, a government that will grab hold of the opportunities and human potential already amongst us in our community. The potential from all of the untapped skills is critical to our economy at a time when skill shortages are becoming an increasing threat to economic growth. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and the member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 519 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Maranoa Electorate: Chinchilla Melon Festival 519 13:30 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa Sadly, many events on the world stage have had to hit pause over the last couple of years: the Olympics, the Grand Prix and, of course, the Chinchilla Melon Festival. But I am pleased to announce that next weekend the Chinchilla Melon Festival is making a triumphant return. Sydney and Melbourne might have been in the bidding for it, but, no, it's staying where it belongs: in my hometown of Chinchilla—one of the true gems of Western Queensland. Chinchilla is the undisputed melon capital of Australia and home of the Big Melon. We produce a staggering total of 25 per cent of our nation's melons. Across next weekend our gentle town of 7,000 will swell to 20,000, and if you've never seen anyone split open 47 watermelons in 67 seconds using nothing but, well, their own melon, you should probably come along. There's something for everyone at the melon festival, be it the grand parade, the pip spitting and eating competitions, the crowning of the biggest melon, markets and, of course, the famous melon ski. This biannual festival takes a lot of hard work and a heap of organising, and I would like to commend the dedicated committee members, contributors and volunteers for pulling it all together. Come for the melons, and stay for a damn good time and a lot of laughs. Just don't wear your Sunday best, because it's bound to get messy. Get your melons on and see you there. Turkiye: Earthquake 519 13:32 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser I rise to extend my condolences to all those affected by the earthquakes in Turkiye, Syria and across that region. The images of collapsed buildings, victims being pulled from the rubble and grief-stricken family members watching on in despair are truly shattering to see. With the death toll in the region now exceeding 11,000 people, the Albanese government has committed $10 million in aid to help those in that region. In addition to this, the government has deployed an urban search and rescue specialist team to assist Turkish authorities. By the end of this week there will be up to 72 personnel to help locate and remove and deliver medical assistance to victims. I have been moved by the community response and it is heartening to see that many Australians have been donating to the relief effort. This week, 20 community organisations formed a crisis coordination committee to assist in organising the various aid that is being organised around the country, and I am proud that the migrant resource centre located in my state electoral district of St Albans is playing a leading role in that committee. The people in the migrant resource centre who are leading that effort are often volunteers who are putting in considerable amounts of time and energy. Thank you for your efforts. Again, my condolences go to all those affected. Cybersafety 519 13:33 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest I am really passionate about young people, in particular, being safe online, and I have put so much time into this in my time as an MP. Tuesday was Safer Internet Day 2023, and it focused on connect, reflect and protect. When you look at some of the statistics from the eSafety Commissioner and you know that 30 per cent of teens have been contacted by a stranger online, there's a reason to be concerned. Many parents of 14- to 17-year-olds aren't aware that their children have viewed potentially harmful content, and that's why this is a really serious family issue as well. I am really proud that we introduced the first Office of the eSafety Commissioner globally. We introduced the Online Safety Act and image-based abuse legislation. But I've got a challenge for everybody watching—I raised this earlier in a speech—it's a challenge because it's a choice for all of us. How are you going to be your best self online? I think that's a question for all of us, no matter what you're doing online. How do you make sure that you're your best self, that there is no harm coming from what you post, what you say, or what you share, for every one that you interact with, and that you're doing your best to make sure that being online is safe, particularly for our young children? International Visitor Leadership Program 519 13:35 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt I had the pleasure of visiting the United States earlier in January as a part of the International Visitor Leadership Program. It was my first time in the United States, and their comprehensive agenda ensured each participant made the most of their time there. The week-long program helped me gain a deeper understanding of US foreign and defence policy, study their strategic engagement in the Indo-Pacific and, most importantly, develop a renewed appreciation for the firm and long-lasting ties between our two countries. Besides visits and roundtables, however, the best part of the program was watching Hamilton with my good friends from this chamber—namely, the members for Cunningham, Solomon, Menzies, Indi, Casey and Moncrieff and, from the other place, Senators Raff Ciccone, Claire Chandler and David Pocock. We were also fortunate to visit the Australian embassy in Washington, DC, with the ambassador, Hon. Arthur Sinodinos, being a wonderful host. Thank you to the US embassy and Department of State for organising such a well-rounded learning experience. I look forward to seeing the cooperation between our two countries grow more substantially. Medicare 520 13:36 Dr RYAN 297660 Kooyong Last week I met with two members of the Doctors Reform Society, Dr John Furler and Dr Tim Woodruff, who shared with me their deep concern about the state of Medicare and our primary healthcare network. I share their concerns. We discussed the government's recent Strengthening Medicare Taskforce Report and our disappointment that the Albanese government has no immediate vision for the current healthcare crisis. The taskforce has come up with a 12-page report with some nice rhetoric but no plan. We need more GPs in rural and regional centres and more incentives for GPs to bulk bill. We need to consider innovative solutions, like socioeconomic based funding of GP clinics. We need primary healthcare clinics providing multidisciplinary care to keep patients out of emergency departments. This government has kicked the can down the road. It has no immediate measures to take even a small degree of pressure off our medical system. Our hospitals, our GP clinics and our mental health care services are underfunded, oversubscribed and, sadly, beginning to fail. Our healthcare professionals are exhausted. Australians are waiting longer for medical and surgical care, and we're paying more to receive it. Our Medicare system needs major reconstructive surgery, not just bandaids and a kiss on the knee. Surfing Victoria 520 13:38 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Did you know that last year, across our nation, 141 people drowned along our coastline? It was the worst outcome in more than 20 years, and unfortunately, the drownings keep happening. Every summer, the locals in my electorate of Corangamite, which includes some of Victoria's best surf beaches, dread hearing news of swimming fatalities, often on unpatrolled beaches involving visitors inexperienced in the surf. Surf lifesavers do an amazing job, but they cannot be everywhere. Surfing Victoria understands this, and that's why they have introduced the Surfers Rescue 24/7 program, harnessing surfers' life-saving potential with training in board rescue and CPR techniques. There are over 80,000 surfers in Victoria, and so far, more than 3,500 have taken part in the program. Surfing Victoria has also partnered with La Trobe University to survey more than 550 Victorian surfers. In the first 24 months of the study, surfers helped prevent drownings by giving safety advice 2,500 times, rescued more than 250 people and administered first aid to over 100 people. What an awesome achievement that is that goes unrecognised. So, today in this chamber, I say thank you to all those surfers who look out for others in the surf and a big congratulations to Surfing Victoria for helping to keep people safe along the coastline. Housing 520 13:39 Mr BATES 300246 Brisbane We're in the midst of a shocking housing crisis. Residents in my electorate are in extreme distress. They struggle to pay their rent or their mortgages, and the situation is getting worse, with no hope of meaningful support in sight. I regularly hear from individuals, couples and families who tell me that they are about to be forced to live in their cars because they have nowhere else to go. When a family is priced out of their own neighbourhood, they lose more than just their home. They're cut off from their community, as are their children, who are forced to move away from their schools and friendships. Even those who are managing to get by in the spiralling rental market—renters make up nearly 60 per cent of my electorate—are having their rents hiked and dreams of owning their own homes stolen from them. The government's funding of 30,000 new affordable homes across the country over the next five years simply does not cut it. The community knows the government's housing plan does not go anywhere near far enough. In fact, when you crunch the numbers, their plan will create only three per cent of the dwellings needed for people experiencing housing stress. We must build enough social housing so we can clear the growing waiting lists and bring the private market back under control. We must freeze rents and establish national tenancy standards to correct the gross imbalances that exist in our national rental market. We must create an economic model that sees housing as an essential human right and not a commodity. Human Rights: Azerbaijan 521 13:41 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong I rise today to bring to the House's attention an issue of concern to many local Australian Armenian constituents in Bennelong—that is, the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in the republic of Artsakh. Australian Armenians are a tight-knit community. I've had the pleasure of working closely with them over the past 10 years in my former capacities of councillor and mayor. They're a passionate community too. We love Australia and they love their homeland, and right now they are hurting. For nearly two months, Azerbaijani operatives have blocked all movements of people, food, fuel and humanitarian supplies from Armenia to Artsakh. The Berdzor corridor, commonly referred to as the 'road of life' is the only land link between Artsakh and the outside world for the self-determined Armenian population. Already, this blockade has started to impact life. I'm informed that over 200 children have been born under siege, that all educational institutions have been shut and that grocery stores have been left empty as authorities in Artsakh have issued food-rationing coupons. This blockade has all the hallmarks of yet another tragic moment in the history of the Armenian people. I note that the Australian government is deeply concerned by the longstanding conflict in the region and that they support calls for a peaceful resolution. The government has conveyed and will continue to convey its views to Azerbaijan through diplomatic channels and ambassadors. I thank the local Armenian community for their advocacy in continuing to provide me with updates. Domestic and Family Violence 521 13:42 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay My community of Lindsay is No. 1 in the state of New South Wales, but it is not a badge that we should be wearing with honour—we are No. 1 when it comes to domestic violence. The high levels of domestic violence that we have experienced recently, with two women losing their lives, is extraordinarily sad, and it's extraordinary bad that this is still happening. I met last week with the local police force, the Nepean Police Area Command, who are stationed in Penrith. As a local police force, they are doing everything they can to deal with the unacceptable situations that are happening in my community, but they can't do it alone. Domestic violence does disproportionally impact women. To prevent it we must intervene at the earliest possible time to support women and their families and to hold offenders accountable for their actions. Governments of all political persuasions across Australia must invest in early intervention strategies that are effective and impactful, with targeted campaigns in communities like mine with high levels of domestic violence. Awareness is one thing. Action is another, and I'm calling on governments across Australia to take a bigger leap forward in their stance to end domestic violence. Murrumbeena Bowls Club 521 13:44 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins I had the pleasure of opening The Green at Murrumbeena Bowls Club last year. It's a 100-year-old institution nestled down a quiet, wide, tree lined street. Malcolm, the club president, led a lively morning of bowls on a glorious spring day. I met Sue, the club champion and local bank manager, who set the pace and warmly invited me to meet the locals. Inside the clubhouse was a treat not to be missed: a passionfruit sponge made by local legend Venora. Venora, at 92 years strong, spoke of her connection with the club. Despite her physical limits, she managed to turn out six delicious cakes, which disappeared before our eyes. This club is more than a meeting place. To Venora it is a source of strength and a solace that once lifted her out of a dark period. She spoke frankly, her words imbued with nearly a century of wisdom. I nodded in agreement, because no price can be put on the social and physical benefits provided by community organisations with the warmth of Murrumbeena Bowls Club. And the best part: unlike the pills I used to prescribe, this prescription has no side effects. I look forward to returning to Murrumbeena Bowls Club for a cuppa and a chat. Flinders Electorate 521 13:45 Ms McKENZIE 124514 Flinders I rise to thank the Leader of the Opposition for his visit to my electorate recently. It was not a hardship task, of course, to visit the most beautiful part of Australia at a most splendid time of the year, but I am grateful for the full day he spent with us, from morning to night. Starting at Esso's gas-processing facility, we saw the place from which 70 per cent of south-eastern Australia's domestic gas needs are met, a major employer in the Western Port area for over 50 years. There are local families where four generations have worked at Long Island Point. Since 2018 Esso has trained 42 apprentices across its two sites, and it has a 100 per cent apprentice retention rate. In Mornington we met with the Committee for Mornington Peninsula and some 30 small businesses, from retail to aged care, tourism, health, education, professional services and agriculture. We heard how small business is struggling with red tape, the cost of living and the lack of skilled workers across the entire peninsula. Back in Somerville we toured the Sealite plant, where world-leading marine and aviation navigation buoys and markers are made and supplied across the globe. From a backyard business to a world leader, Sealite confronts daily supply chain disruptions and navigates unpredictable energy prices, but practicality, pragmatism and engineering brilliance have made Sealite the No. 1 provider in its field. We then inspected some of the $300 million worth of infrastructure projects that have been funded by the coalition in previous governments, now all at risk in the next Albanese budget. Bushmaster 522 13:46 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo People in this place know that I am a big fan and supporter of the Bendigo-built Bushmaster. It is a vehicle that is credited with saving Australian men and women in the armed forces, not just in Afghanistan but in all conflicts. It is making a huge difference in Ukraine. Our government and the previous government are in the process of gifting up to 90 Bushmasters to Ukraine. They are making a difference. We were quite pleased, less than two weeks ago, to welcome to Bendigo the Prime Minister, who made time to come and thank the men and women who build the Bushmasters. He visited the site on Friday the 27th, met with the workers and thanked them for what they do. Whilst at the site, we were able to see the Bushmasters that we're building for New Zealand. They will soon go to New Zealand, which is a great demonstration of how well this vehicle is doing. Not only is it helping in Ukraine, not only is it a vehicle that is saving the lives of Australian men and women; countries like New Zealand are now purchasing our Bushmasters. I want to thank the Prime Minister for taking the time to meet the men and women who build the Bushmaster. They are very proud of what they do and the contribution that they are making. This is a good story. It's local jobs, helping local people. We want to see more of it. Harris, Ms Linda, OAM 522 13:48 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay If the community around her were a ship, Linda Harris would be at the helm. Linda is a trailblazer, a female mayor when they weren't all that common; a female director of the Canegrowers association, when there hadn't been one before her; and a champion for Tiaro district, all while being wife to Mal and mum to Kerry, Gaye and Anna. Linda steered her community through the rough waters of local government amalgamation and then fought for Tiaro's share from the new amalgamated council. Even in retirement, Linda's steadfast commitment to Tiaro and the Fraser Coast continues. At 73, Linda is still working in her community for the new Tiaro bypass, volunteering for Rotary, conducting meetings and functions, catering, fundraising and organising. Linda volunteers with the Tiaro & District Chamber of Commerce, the Tiaro Visitor Information Centre, the Tiaro community hall and the Liberal National Party. As they say, anyone can steer a ship when the sea is calm. It takes an experienced hand to navigate difficult situations, and Linda is someone whose compass I look to for guidance in our combined desire to make sure that Tiaro and the Fraser Coast move forward. Congratulations, Linda Harris OAM, on your well-deserved award in the Order of Australia. Turkiye and Syria: Earthquake 522 13:50 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke Like all of us in this place, I have watched in horror the devastation caused by the earthquakes in Turkiye and Syria. In my electorate of Hawke and across Melbourne there is a very proud Turkish diaspora. This week they are hurting, and we are all hurting with them. But through the pain of the stories they're hearing from friends and family and the shock of the images and videos from on the ground, they are organising. From Melbourne, they are sending donations, arranging aid and holding each other up. It is so bittersweet that we see the best of us at the worst of times. There will be a long road to recovery for the people of Turkiye and Syria. In Syria, war and humanitarian crisis will make this task even harder. The Australian people and our government stand in solidarity with them. Penny Wong, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, has announced that this government will provide an initial $10 million in humanitarian assistance targeting those in greatest need across both countries, and that's done with the support of those opposite. Locally, we will support our Turkish and Syrian friends and neighbours, communities who have given so much to build modern Australia. To families and communities who have lost loved ones and those whose lives and livelihoods have been affected, I extend my greatest sympathies. Veterans 522 13:51 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Veterans have an advocate and ally in Julie-Ann Finney. Last week was the fourth anniversary of the loss of her son Petty Officer David Stafford Finney, a proud member of the Royal Australian Navy, 38 years young—gone too soon. Julie-Ann has attended each and every one of the hearing days of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide. She was at Wagga Wagga between 28 November and 1 December last year. While there, she visited the Pro Patria wellbeing centre that is being driven by the community and that would have been the beneficiary of $5 million of government support, had that money not being withdrawn. Julie-Ann is a supporter of that facility. She said: 'We're forever looking for answers, for solutions. Pro Patria is the solution. We need places and services like Pro Patria.' She joins Wagga Wagga veteran Jason Frost, community member Alan Lean and so many others, myself included, who are very much staunch supporters of this facility. I call on the veterans affairs minister to support in the May budget this much-needed facility that Wagga Wagga and the Riverina deserve. Education Workforce 523 13:53 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I rise today to commend the member for Blaxland, the Minister for Education, on his getting on with the job and addressing some of our critical needs in teaching across this country. In my electorate, before the end of last year, Minister Clare joined me and the Victorian Minister for Education, Natalie Hutchins, at a local primary school, Tarneit P-9 College, with its principal, Anne-Maree Kliman. We hosted a roundtable of teachers and principals from across Victoria to discuss the consultation that had gone on around the country about the teacher shortage, about teacher quality and about elevating the teaching profession. I thank local principal Nadia for attending as network chair, representing all of my local principals. On that day, we were faced with a shortage of 1,100 teachers in my electorate. I commend all of the principals who've done all the hard work, but in terms of elevating teaching, let me do my bit. What a fabulous, fabulous profession it is. Do yourself a favour; become a teacher. It's complex, it's difficult but it is the most rewarding job on the planet, aside from being elevated to the federal parliament, that is. Here's to all the teachers out there across the country doing it tough, and here's to their getting more support. Roads 523 13:54 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker Grain Producers SA is the peak body that represents grain farming businesses across South Australia. Last week, I met with Grain Producers SA to discuss their recently released Worst Grain Road report, which has identified the 10 worst roads in South Australia, as identified by that industry. It's a really important piece of work and one that governments at every level should take note of because our current grain harvest is expected to be the largest on record, contributing a whopping $4.5 billion to the South Australian economy. Such a massive contributor to our state's prosperity deserves to be given the right tools to get the job done in the most productive and efficient way possible. Unfortunately, our grain producers are not only losing productivity because of the terrible condition of these roads, but they're also putting their safety and the safety of other road users at risk. Roads like the Upper Yorke Road on the Yorke Peninsula, Nine Mile Road in Malinong, the Worlds End Highway, the Mallee Highway—which is no surprise to me as a regular traveller on that road in my electorate of Barker—and the Flinders Highway make up the top five. We need state and federal governments to start recognising that our regions matter and start funding our roads adequately. Albo, it's time to fix these roads. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member will resume his seat and refer to members by their correct title. I give the call to the member for Macquarie. Mountain Culture Beer Co 523 13:56 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie Congratulations to Blue Mountains business Mountain Culture, who've won the No. 1 spot on the GABS Hottest 100 with their status quo pale ale. I recently had the pleasure of pulling a schooner of this delightful beer at Mountain Culture's new Emu Plains brewery. I'm not going to become a beer wordsmith to describe it, except to say that the New England pale ale was a great drink on a hot day. This Blue Mountains business is an incredible success story. When it started in Katoomba in 2017, DJ McCready and wife, Harriet, had no idea how popular their brews would be. The brew pub, as they call it, only a couple of minutes walk from Katoomba Station, is an old heritage building where you can view the brewing process. A steady stream of people passionate about good-quality craft beer travel to the mountains or indulge in online purchases. It means their growth has been 400 per cent year on year. Their second location is an incredible one at the base of the mountains. I was fascinated to look out at the huge beer tanks where beer was fermenting. While the expansion looks effortless from the outside, I know too well the hard work, the risk-taking and the sleeplessness that they will have experienced as entrepreneurs. It's the same risk that every small business takes when it starts, grows and sustains. I'm thrilled for their success and look forward to seeing what they do next. Bennett, Mr John Patrick, AM 524 13:57 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon In Tasmania, we recently lost a legend in the Australian dairy industry with the passing of John Bennett AM. The Ashgrove Farms and Ashgrove Cheese co-founder was instrumental in shaping the modern dairy industry as we know it today. In the early nineties, with unemployment high and the Tasmanian dairy farmer pay the worst in the world, his family risked everything to stay on the land. His decision to vertically integrate his dairy operation into a paddock-to-plate business model was visionary. It was an idea unheard of at the time. In 2017, John was awarded the Rural Australian Farming Legend of the Year, recognising his visionary leadership, courage and lifetime contribution to the Australian dairy industry. From a personal perspective, John was an important role model for me. He was always gracious in the delivery of his time and generously shared his wealth of knowledge about the industry and his vision for a better future. I'll always cherish his enormous strength of character and the ability that he gave me when I needed it most. I extend my deepest sympathies to John's wife, Connie, and the entire Bennett family. Vale, John Bennett AM. CORE Community Services 524 13:59 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa Last week, I met with CORE Community Services staff to discuss the work they do in south-west Sydney and their participation in the new Community Partnership Pilot program with Services Australia. The pilot program is designed to connect people with government services and payments they otherwise would have difficulty accessing. CORE has been operating in south-west Sydney for almost 40 years and provides food relief, multilingual outreach programs and youth programs among its services. CORE have centres in hubs throughout south-west Sydney. During the meeting, we discussed the impact the pilot program has had on the two community partnership specialist officers, Sothy and Phonethip, and especially those with non-English-speaking backgrounds. They do an amazing job and are over the moon that they can make a difference, particularly for women who are escaping domestic violence. I thank them for all that they are doing in our community. I look forward to this program expanding further throughout Australia. I'd like to thank the CEO of CORE and the strategy and performance manager for taking the time to meet with me. It was absolutely wonderful to meet everyone on that day. The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. CONDOLENCES 524 CONDOLENCES Molan, Senator Andrew James (Jim), AO, DSC 524 Report from Federation Chamber 524 14:00 The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the motion moved by the honourable Prime Minister be agreed to. As a mark of respect, I ask all present to signify their approval by rising in their places. Question agreed to, honourable members standing in their places. Arnold, Constable Matthew, Dare, Mr Alan, McCrow, Constable Rachel 524 Report from Federation Chamber 524 14:01 The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the motion moved by the honourable Prime Minister be agreed to. As a mark of respect, I ask all present to signify their approval by rising in their places. Question agreed to, honourable members standing in their places. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 525 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Cost of Living 525 14:02 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson My question is to the Prime Minister. Before the election, this Prime Minister misled Australians when he said families would be better off under a Labor government. Since Labor was elected, interest rates have gone up eight times and mortgage repayments have increased by $1,400 for a typical family. To make it worse, the Albanese government's economic policies are fuelling inflation and driving interest rates higher. Prime Minister, why do Australian families always pay more under Labor? The SPEAKER 53517 Member for Deakin, the Prime Minister will be heard in silence. 14:02 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Australians are certainly paying the price for a decade of Liberal and National neglect. That's what's going on here. They're paying a price for delay, denial, waste and rorts. We have been impacted by international circumstances arising from the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but because of the decade of neglect we didn't have the preparation that we needed. We were more vulnerable than we would have been because those opposite left us with $1 trillion of debt with not enough to show for it. Those opposite left us with skills shortages, including in areas where they told everyone to leave the country and refused to provide them with any financial support whatsoever. Those opposite left us with a decade of stagnant wages, not because of bad luck but because of bad policy. They said that low wages were a key design feature of their economic architecture. Those opposite spent the Abbott years—apparently he might be coming back in the Senate; there's a sign they're in touch with the future for you—saying no to everything, and then they got into government and just kept saying no because they didn't have any positive plans even when they were in government. Now they are just saying no to everything again. 'No' to the National Reconstruction Fund, which is about supply chains, which is about jobs, which is about Australian manufacturing, which is about Australian resilience, which is about leaving us less vulnerable to international shocks. What do those opposite say? They say: 'No, we're against that. We're against that because it will have an independent board and won't rort the funding.' It's something they don't recognise! 'No' to secure jobs, 'no' to Australian manufacturing, 'no' to new industries. They are defining themselves once again not by what they're for but by what they're against. National Reconstruction Fund 525 14:05 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke My question is to the Minister for Industry and Science. How has the National Reconstruction Fund been received by industry? Are there any threats to helping Australian industry access the fund? The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Barker will refrain from saying such statements. 14:06 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley We said before the election that we were very focused on addressing manufacturing self-sufficiency. We said we'd revitalise manufacturing, and a big part of that is the National Reconstruction fund. We said that this is what we would do, and we are not wasting any time in working on that. I can report to the House that the consultations around the National Reconstruction Fund, which will be modelled off the successful Clean Energy Finance Corporation, have been very positive. Chemistry Australia described the NRF as a once-in-a-generation opportunity. The Tech Council of Australia says this is a landmark investment. Group of Eight says the NRF will be a strategic pillar in Australia's future economic prosperity. Orica says supporting the further development of Australia's industrial capability and sovereign strength is very important. The Minerals Council of Australia says the NRF will be an important vehicle to support regional industries. Ai Group— An opposition member interjecting— Mr HUSIC 91219 Exactly! Why do they hate the regions? Ai Group says the NRF elevates industrial transformation to the top of the economic policy agenda. The Business Council of Australia says the NRF is an important step towards diversifying and transforming Australia's industries and economy. It's supported by the Australian Investment Council, ACTU, Macquarie Group, Science and Technology Australia, Telstra, Universities of Australia—heaps. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the Nationals will cease interjecting. Mr HUS 91219 However, the only people that won't support the NRF are those opposite, a reckless indifference threatening not only Australian jobs but Australian capability and sovereignty. Liberal opposition to the NRF would result in us continuing to be reliant on foreign supply chains. On this side of the House we want to see more 'Made in Australia' labels on Aussie made products. That's what we're focused on. We know Australians will back Australian made goods. On this side of the House, Made in Australia; on that side of the House, made anywhere but. There's a big difference. I have to say, I couldn't help noticing the industry minister from the coalition—I don't know if it's industry minister No. 6; it was like watching a David Jones food hall: you take a ticket, you wait in line and in 300 days another one comes back. Industry minister No. 6, the member for McPherson, said that the NRF would be throwing taxpayer money away. Fiscal rectitude from those opposite, after all the warning that they did saying that that would be the case. They have learnt nothing, support nothing, stand for nothing and will oppose everything. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 53517 the Assistant Treasurer will cease interjecting, as will the Leader of the Nationals. There is far too much noise in the chamber. I want to hear the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in silence. Economy 526 14:09 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Prime Minister. Over the course of the previous coalition government's time in office, the Reserve Bank of Australia met almost 100 times and raised interest rates once. Under the Albanese government, the Reserve Bank met on eight occasions and has raised interest rates eight times. Using his economics degree— Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. Before the deputy leader spoke, I asked that she be heard in silence. The SPEAKER 53517 The Treasurer will cease interjecting. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hume! The deputy leader will be heard in absolute silence. If she's not, action will be taken. She will begin her question again. Ms LEY 00AMN My question is to the Prime Minister. Over the course of the previous coalition government's time in office, the Reserve Bank of Australia met almost 100 times and raised interest rates once. Under the Albanese government, the Reserve Bank has met on eight occasions and has raised interest rates eight times. Using his economics degree, can the Prime Minister confirm that, under the coalition, interest rates rose about one per cent of the time but under Labor they are rising 100 per cent of the time? Why do Australians families always pay more under Labor? (Time expired) Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! I could barely hear the end of the question. 14:11 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler That's because it was timed out, Mr Speaker! I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for her question. It is quite an extraordinary question, the way it was put. It seems to ignore the fact that the Reserve Bank of Australia is an independent body, is the first point I would make—and you don't need an economics degree to know that. But apparently that's beyond the capacity of those opposite. The second thing that I will confirm is that the economy started growing under Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, and it grew for 30 years. It grew even when the entire world went into a global financial crisis. The economy continued to grow. When did a recession come? Who was in government? When a recession comes, the Reserve Bank decreases interest rates in order to stimulate the economy. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister will pause. Unless I can hear the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, I will not take her point of order. I give her the call on a point of order. Ms Ley 00AMN On relevance: can the Prime Minister count to 100? The SPEAKER 53517 I have been more than tolerant with this abuse of standing orders. This is not the first time the deputy leader has done this. As much as I don't want to do this, she will leave the chamber under 94(a) for abuse of standing orders. The member for Farrer then left the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Gellibrand will withdraw that comment. Mr Watts 193430 I withdraw. The SPEAKER 53517 When the House comes back to order the Prime Minister will be heard in silence, or further people will leave the chamber. Mr ALBANESE R36 Thanks very much, Mr Speaker. When recessions occur as happened under the former government, what reserve banks and central banks around the world do is that they support the stimulation of the economy. Therefore, you have a reduction in interest rates. Then when there's global inflation, around the world central banks increase interest rates. That's what occurs. The level of debate that we are having here from those opposite is just extraordinary. I mean, this is the alternative government of Australia. The shadow Treasurer, who refuses to ask a question of the Treasurer—this is what he said, not before the election but on 28 September, in an opinion piece, so he wrote it down. He actually thought about it and submitted it to that great journal The Australian. He said: It is very clear that the world has changed dramatically even in the past few months … We've seen a rapid shift to an inflationary environment. Interest rates are bucking decades of downward trends. Those opposite show their economic illiteracy in here day after day. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Page will cease interjecting. Mining Industry 527 14:15 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan My question is to the Minister for Resources and Minister for Northern Australia. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to establish new supply chains in the resources sector, and what threatens these efforts? The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for O'Connor is warned. When ministers are about to answer questions, that is not the time to interject. 14:16 Ms MADELEINE KING 102376 Brand I want to thank the member for Swan for her question—a former mine worker, before coming to this place, and also the daughter of a nickel miner in Kambalda, in the great state of Western Australia. Australians, particularly Western Australians, know how important the resources sector is to our economy. The sector accounts for our three largest exports. Each of them, coal, iron ore and LNG, are of enormous importance both to Australia and to all the nations that we export them to. Australia has some of the world's richest deposits of critical minerals reserves, but supply chains for critical minerals are more vulnerable than our established resources industries. Our international allies and like-minded partners are increasingly looking to us in Australia as a reliable, secure and resilient supplier of the critical minerals they need to reach net zero emissions. To this end, we are progressing the critical minerals investment partnership with India. We are working with partners in the Mineral Security Partnership, with Canada, Germany, France, Finland, Japan, Korea, Sweden, the UK and EC, and the Sustainable Critical Minerals Alliance, with Canada, the UK, France, Germany and the US. We've signed bilateral agreements with Japan and the US, and we're actively working with the EU on a strategic partnership. These efforts are all crucial for building new and reliable supply chains. I'm asked, 'How are these efforts threatened?' In a decision that defies belief and reveals their hypocrisy, those opposite have chosen to abandon their support for the processing of critical minerals in Australia, by failing to support the $1 billion Value-Adding in Resources Fund as part of the National Reconstruction Fund. Those opposite never supported the manufacturing industry in this country. We know they pushed the car industry offshore, and now they are trying to do the same thing with the critical minerals processing industry before it has even gotten off the ground. Less than a year ago, all of the resources ministers in this country, all of the treasurers of this country—we know there were two of each of them—and the Prime Minister of the coalition government were trumpeting their support for the critical minerals industry. In fact, even all the industry ministers at the time—of course, there were two of them—were also exhibiting their support, with former minister for industry the member for Hume saying, 'We are committed to building Australia's capability in critical minerals processing and increasing our contribution to global battery supply chains.' Well, what a difference a mere eight months makes! It's amazing—the member for Hume, the various ministers for resources and the various former treasurers of this country have had a turnaround. This government supports critical minerals processing and the advanced manufacturing capacity of this country, and we will do so through the National Reconstruction Fund, with a $1 billion Value-Adding in Resources Fund, with or without those opposite. (Time expired) DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 528 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Crawford, Hon. Craig, Robinson, Dr Mark 528 14:19 The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Before I call the member for Brisbane, I am pleased to inform the House that present in the gallery today is Hon. Craig Crawford MP, the Minister for Seniors and Disability Services and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Islander Strait Partnerships in the Queensland parliament, and Dr Mark Robinson MP, the state member for Oodgeroo in the Queensland parliament. On behalf of the House, I extend a warm welcome to you both. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 528 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Housing Affordability 528 14:19 Mr BATES 300246 Brisbane My question is to the Minister for Housing. There are 36,566 dwellings under the National Rental Affordability Scheme across the country, with Queensland home to almost one-third of these. All are to be removed from the market by 2026. But the government's housing future fund has only promised 30,000 affordable homes over five years. As rents and interest rates continue to skyrocket, does the government acknowledge this plan doesn't even account for the loss of NRAS housing, let alone deal with the scale of the housing crisis? 14:20 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I thank the member opposite for his question. The Albanese government does understand that safe and affordable housing is central to the security and dignity of all Australians, and we want every Australian to have the security of a roof over their head. Indeed, the National Rental Affordability Scheme provided rental accommodation to around 55,000 Australians but was abolished by the former government eight years ago. Eight years ago they cancelled NRAS, and homes have been leaving the scheme since 2018, when the 10-year agreement started to expire, without any plan to replace the homes. There's no sugar-coating that rental affordability challenges exist, which is why we have our $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund which we introduced into the parliament today. The NRAS scheme is a perfect example, though, of the neglect those opposite showed to housing over the last decade. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Deakin will cease interjecting. Ms COLLINS HWM Our solutions are long-term and will provide certainty and stability for future projects, with the fund there in perpetuity and the returns being invested in social and affordable housing. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Deakin has been asked to stop interjecting. Ms COLLINS HWM Indeed, we've already unlocked up to $575 million to immediately invest in social and affordable housing, and these projects are underway today. I've already made announcements around the country about some of these projects—of course, the 30,000 social and affordable homes that will come from the Housing Australia Future Fund, and then, on top of that, the National Housing Accord, which we agreed between state and federal governments and announced in the last budget. Of course, our 30,000 is on top of what the states and territories are already doing. The government's $350 million will, in addition, mean 10,000 additional homes which will be added to by the states and territories with another 10,000 affordable homes. And, of course, there's the aspiration of the accord for one million homes right across the country over the five years. We've also brought forward our Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee. That has already helped 1,700 Australians in regional Australia into their first homes. Our government equity scheme, Help to Buy, will be coming out. And, of course, our National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, which we introduced into parliament today, will be working with all the other tiers of government to provide independent advice about how we get more homes on the ground more quickly right across the country. Energy 529 14:22 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How is the Albanese Labor government supporting regions in the transition to a clean energy economy? How does the government's energy policy complement the government's priority to create manufacturing jobs? 14:23 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for her question and recognise her leadership on regional jobs and renewable energy. She knows they go hand in hand. I'm very pleased to report to the member for Bendigo and the House the latest figures from the Clean Energy Regulator, released in the last 24 hours, showing large-scale renewable energy investment up 50 per cent last year. The Clean Energy Regulator advises me a significant majority of that increase occurred after May, because the only thing holding Australia back was not a lack of renewable energy but a lack of policy. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom will cease interjecting. Mr BOWEN DZS Twenty-two energy policies in nine years. I'm also pleased to inform the House— Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right. I know it's Thursday and everyone's a bit excited, but can everyone just remain silent so I can hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Fletcher L6B On relevance. That question contained absolutely no reference to the policies of the previous government. It referred to how does this government's policy complement this government's manufacturing policy. The minister, who is a serial offender— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. I will uphold the point of order. There was no comparison to the former government. I ask the minister to return to the question. Mr BOWEN DZS I can also inform the House that electric vehicle sales are up 87 per cent, in the latest figures, thanks to the electric vehicle tax cut put through by the government and opposed by the opposition. Under the Albanese government, we don't just want to make renewable energy in Australia; we want to make what makes renewable energy in Australia. We want to make solar panels and batteries and electrolysers and transformers in Australia. That's why we have the National Reconstruction Fund. Up to $3 billion is allocated for clean energy investments, and $1 billion is allocated—as the Minister for Resources said—for adding value to critical minerals. We are the world's largest supplier of so many critical minerals, but we also want to process and add value, and that takes investment and that takes governments working together because this means jobs. Who could be against such a policy? Who could be against investing in Australian jobs? Perhaps the same operation that opposed the 43 per cent target being legislated, which has attracted so much of that renewable energy investment. Or perhaps it is the same people who opposed the electric vehicle tax cut, or perhaps the same people who opposed their own safeguard crediting mechanism, which they suggested just 12 months ago. When the member for Hume is not congratulating himself on Facebook, he's in a debate with himself about policy about safeguard mechanisms. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will resume his seat. I will call the manager when the House comes to order. The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Climate Change and Energy will soon be back on the microphone. I don't need to hear from him just yet. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order? Mr Fletcher L6B The minister is defying your ruling. You were very clear in what you directed the minister to do, and he is ignoring you. He's once again trampling— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. I invite the minister back to the question. Mr BOWEN DZS The Albanese government is getting on with the policy of investing in manufacturing and investing in the energy transition. As the previous ministers have said, we will do so with or without the support of the opposition. It tells the Australian people a lot about the opposition that they're against our policies and they're against their own policies. This is what happens when you have a leader of the opposition with no ideas of his own, with no vision for our country and who is not prepared to act in the national interest. We know that members opposite know that these policies are in the national interest because we read about the shadow cabinet reports. Yet they still vote against them. This is what happens when you have a leader of the opposition who is all opposition and no leader. Interest Rates 530 14:27 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Prime Minister. We've now seen eight consecutive interest rate rises under this government. Yesterday on Sky News the Assistant Treasurer said about these rises: 'What's already in the system should do the job.' But the RBA governor says 'further increases in interest rates will be needed over the months ahead'. Prime Minister, who is right: the Assistant Treasurer or the RBA governor? Why do Australian families always pay more under Labor? 14:28 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the shadow Treasurer for his question, but I do express some disappointment on behalf of the Treasurer for the impossibility there is of him getting a question. I do raise this issue just to encourage those opposite to give the Treasurer a crack. Angus Taylor, the shadow Treasurer, in his own words, said in September: It is very clear that the world has changed dramatically even in the past few months … We've seen a rapid shift to an inflationary environment. Interest rates are bucking decades of downward trends. On that occasion, in that particular opinion piece in the Australian, the shadow Treasurer—perhaps for the first time since he entered this chamber all those years ago—has got one thing right. Gender Pay Gap 530 14:29 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. What steps are the government taking—and what obstacles have there been—to boost wages and to close the gender pay gap? Why are there so many loopholes that have kept wages too low? 14:29 M DYW Watson r BURKE (—) (): I thank the member for Dunkley, who has been a tireless defender of working people in this parliament. There's a really simple reason why wages were kept low. That's that the previous government wanted to keep wages low. And there's a really simple way of explaining the obstacles that have presented when we've tried to get wages moving. It's that those opposite still want to keep wages low. When we put to the parliament stronger pay equity laws, they said no; we said yes to helping low-paid, female dominated sectors get pay increases. When we put sections prohibiting sexual harassment in the 'secure jobs, better pay' bill, they said no to those provisions in the law; we said yes to safer workplaces for women and an accessible process for workers. When we put forward better access to flexible working arrangements, they voted no; we said yes to the parents and carers who need more flexible working arrangements. When we put forward legislation to ban pay secrecy clauses, one of the key drivers of the gender pay gap, what do you reckon they said? Government members: No. Mr BURKE DYW They said no, and we said yes to closing the gender pay gap. When we put forward the sunsetting of zombie agreements, they said no to that. They voted no and wanted to keep agreements from way back in the WorkChoices era valid. Let me give you one example of what that means. The Mantle Group, up until last year, still had their workers employed on an agreement from 1999. Those opposite thought that was okay. Mantle Group had been enjoying a massive windfall of not having to pay penalty rates for 22 years, and those opposite voted no to fixing that loophole. The Fair Work Commission said: The effect of this employer having the benefit of an agreement made in 1999, without the payment to employees of penalty rates, at least in the last decade, is a disgrace. …   …   … I consider it necessary for a light to be shone on these kinds of archaic agreements. Mantle Group then went off to look for the next loophole. They had a new enterprise agreement negotiated between HR and four members of management that would then apply to the entire workforce. We'll have more legislation this year to close loopholes. Those opposite will vote no because every loophole that drives down wages they have been determined to defend. Energy 530 14:32 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls My question is to the Prime Minister. Kalafatis Fresh Produce, a major supplier of apples, pears and stone fruit in the Goulburn Valley, is facing a skyrocketing monthly electricity bill, rising from $50,000 a month to $100,000 a month under Labor. Why are Goulburn Valley businesses having to pay for Labor's broken promise to lower electricity prices by $275? And why do Australians always pay more under Labor? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order, the member for Hume and the Leader of the Nationals. I'll give the call to the Prime Minister, and he will be heard in silence. 14:33 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Nicholls for his question. I think this is the first one he has asked of me since his election. I congratulate him on his election, and I wish him well on a personal level. Can I say, when it comes to thanks, though, that all members in this chamber had an opportunity last December to decide whether they were in favour of higher energy prices or lower energy prices. We on this side were in favour of lower energy prices. Those opposite voted for higher energy prices. You don't have to listen to people just inside this chamber. AGL know a bit about the business. They put out their statement to the stock exchange for their half-yearly results for 2022-23. A statement to the Australian Stock Exchange is a very serious document. They said this: Notably, the impact of government intervention contributed to a sharp decline in forward electricity prices … That's what they had to say. That's what's going on. AGL CEO Damien Nicks is then quoted in the West Australian today as saying: … the National Energy Price Relief Plan has contributed to a reduction in wholesale electricity forward prices from historically high levels … That's what the people on the front line are saying. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hume is warned. Mr ALBANESE R36 In some places this isn't partisan. The New South Wales Premier had this to say: I'm a free market guy, and also a practical guy too. And the reality is, we stand with households and families across New South Wales. That's what he had to say. He went on to say: … states and territories working with the Commonwealth Government, everyone at National Cabinet is on a unity ticket. Indeed, they were. The New South Wales Treasurer said: 'We're not on the side of energy bosses. We're on the side of consumers and businesses.' I wonder who he was thinking of. The fact is that the Russian invasion of Ukraine, together with the exposure that we have to international markets as a result of policy issues is why these issues are being dealt with. Along with state and territory governments, we were dealing with these issues. Those opposite refused to be a part of any solution to these issues and chose instead to oppose, as they do— (Time expired) Economy 531 14:36 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton My question is to the Treasurer. How does getting wages moving again, after a decade when they were kept deliberately low, help to address the inflation challenge in the economy? 14:36 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thanks to my great friend and electoral neighbour the member for Moreton. He is an absolute champion of working people in the southern suburbs of Brisbane. We said we would get wages moving again in responsible ways, and we are pleased to see that wages are beginning to move again in our economy, because we recognise that a wasted decade of wage stagnation has harmed our economic prospects and hurt our people and because the best way to deal with the cost-of-living pressures people are facing is to make sure that they can earn enough to provide for their loved ones and get ahead. That's why one of our first acts as a government was to support a wage increase for minimum- and award-wage workers. We said we would do that and we did it. We said we'd fix the broken bargaining system, which was acting as a barrier to productive workplaces and sustainable wages growth, and we are doing that too. We said we'd support a wage increase for aged-care workers, and our next budget, in May, will fund that important change. We said we would train people for higher-wage opportunities, to make it easier for new parents, especially mums, to work more and earn more if they choose to, and we are doing that too. It's still early days, but we are really pleased to see the beginnings of wages growth in the economy again. Recent data shows that wages are growing at their fastest rate through the year since the beginning of 2013, before the previous government was elected. As we all know, we have an inflation challenge in our economy, but we do not have that inflation challenge because wages are too high. On the contrary, wages have been too low for too long in our economy. We seek wages growth which is strong and sustainable in an economy which is more productive and more competitive and which creates more high-wage, high-skill opportunities for more of our people. That's the government's goal and that's what our economic plan is all about. We know that strong and sustainable wages growth is good for the economy and not bad for the economy. That's why this Labor government and this Labor Prime Minister will always work to get wages moving in our economy. This was a key issue at the election, and those opposite have learned absolutely nothing from the outcome of that election. Nothing would make them happier than to return to the past, where wages were stagnant as a deliberate consequence of their policy. If they want to stand up for working people, they shouldn't stand in the way of minimum wage increases. If they want to stand up for working people, they should support fixing a broken system. And if they want to support working people, they shouldn't stand in the way of our efforts to get wages moving again in our economy, because if you're standing in the way of decent wages growth in our economy, you're standing in the way of working people and you're standing in the way of the type of economy which Australian working people need and deserve, one which rewards their effort. Asylum Seekers 532 14:40 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. I refer to her response in the House yesterday when she said that there was quite a process involved in redesignating Nauru as a regional processing country. A key process is consulting and receiving advice from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Given that the minister admitted that she was made aware of the lapse on 15 December, why did the minister not write to the UNHCR until 27 January? Given the urgency of this situation, why did the minister wait six weeks to do anything? 14:40 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham I do note the longstanding interest of the shadow minister in the views of the UN. I think the shadow minister should be well aware of the obligations under 198AB and 198AC of the Migration Act, which require me to consult with the United Nations. I have a statutory obligation to do that. I assume she is aware that I did that, because I tabled a statement to that effect in the parliament on Tuesday. I met the obligations set out for me in the act, and this problem was fixed on Tuesday. Child Care 532 14:41 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra My question is to the Prime Minister. How will the government's cheaper child care plan and our update to paid parental leave make life easier for Australian families? 14:41 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Canberra for her question, and it was a delight this morning to be with you at the childcare centre at Manuka, along with Minister Clare and Minister Aly, and it was great to meet with young Olivia, Bradley, Lulu, Beau, Sophie and Claire. They were a delight to spend time with and they're a credit to their families, but they're also a credit to the early learning educators. Every time you go into an early learning centre you see children learning social interaction. You see children benefiting from these skills that early learning educators have. You see the benefit of child care. And our policy, passed through this parliament, which will make child care cheaper from 1 July, will benefit those children. It will also benefit families and will also benefit our national economy, by increasing women's workforce participation and by increasing productivity. That's why it received such strong support from the business community. Today we announced that Professor Emerita Deb Brennan AM will co-lead the inquiry for our next step. What we committed to during the election campaign was to make sure that not only would we put in place this policy, which we announced in my first budget reply—in the days when opposition leaders had policies in their budget replies—and it will float through from July, but also that a Productivity Commission review would occur to look at universal affordable child care. These terms of reference that we announced today will look at affordability, access, and workforce issues going forward. This is part of our plan to improve economic security for Australians. It goes together with the legislation that has been passed to update Australia's paid parental leave scheme so that it better reflects modern family life, to give families more flexibility. These changes mean that parents can return to work part-time using paid parental leave and mean that both parents can take part of their leave at the same time. These changes mean it's easier for dads to take leave. These changes mean that single parents will get the same number of weeks as two-parent families. There's more to come: six months of paid parental leave, which will benefit about 180,000 families. This government is committed to making a difference, and our plan for early learning will do just that. Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct 532 14:44 Dr RYAN 297660 Kooyong My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. Yesterday you blocked a new coalmine in Queensland because of its adverse environmental effects on the Great Barrier Reef. This was an excellent application of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. Will you also rejected the Middle Arm development because of its inevitable, irreversible and unacceptable environmental impact on the Darwin harbour? 14:45 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I thank the honourable member for her question. I did, yesterday, announce that I would not allow the Central Queensland coal project to proceed. I made that decision because the risk to the Great Barrier Reef, to freshwater creeks and to groundwater beside the proposed mine was simply too great. The Great Barrier Reef is responsible for about $6 billion worth of economic activity every year and about 64,000 jobs. Given the science before me, it became apparent that the risks were simply too great. The honourable member referred to another project. I will make each decision that comes before me on a case-by-case basis, according to the law and according to the science that is available. Paid Parental Leave Scheme 533 14:46 Mr LIM 300130 Tangney My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering on its budget commitment to improve the Paid Parental Leave scheme, after nearly a decade policy stagnation? 14:46 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I'd like to thank the member for Tangney for his question and for his fierce advocacy for families in his electorate. Earlier today, legislation to improve and modernise paid parental leave passed this House. The Albanese government has listened to families and has acted. We know that dads and partners want to spend more time with their babies. We know parents want flexibility in how they choose to take leave and transition back to work. And we know the current eligibility rules are unfair to families where the mother is the higher income earner. Our legislation that passed the House today fixes these problems. From July 2023, 180,000 families each year will benefit from a stronger, more generous scheme, and there's more to come. I will soon be bringing forward more legislation to deliver the biggest expansion to paid parental leave since Labor first established it in 2011. We are doing this responsibly, extending the scheme by two weeks each year from 2024, until we reach six months in 2026. Our government has wasted no time in making sure that we are delivering more flexible and improved paid parental leave. I am asked about how that compares to those opposite—the decade of policy stagnation when it comes to paid parental leave. To be fair to those opposite, it wasn't just stagnation. They did, to be fair, in the 2015-16 budget, try and rip close to $1 billion out of paid parental leave, accusing 80,000 mothers of being double dippers, saying that they didn't deserve to be supported by their employer as well as the government. This was something that really grated on many women and families around the country. We know that families are trying to spend as much time as they can to ensure that they're still able to afford to pay household bills. This is what our improvements will do. So, far from accusing parents and mothers of being double dippers, far from trying to rip money out of the Paid Parental Leave scheme, we are fixing it, the result of nine years of the coalition government's inaction, which has dragged Australia's Paid Parental Leave scheme behind the rest of the OECD. It has taken the election of this Labor government to deliver for working families, and that's what we will continue to do. Cost of Living 533 14:49 Mr PIKE 300120 Bowman My question is to the Prime Minister. Brendan in my electorate of Bowman runs a shed-building business. In October last year his quarterly energy bill was just $400. In January this year his bill had more than doubled to $838, despite his monthly usage having gone down. Prime Minister, why do Australian families and small businesses always pay more under Labor? The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Lyons will cease interjecting. 14:50 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Bowman for his question, and I hope he tells Brendan that he voted against helping him. I hope he tells Brendan. I hope he says: 'Sorry, Brendan. Sorry about that, mate, but I had to put politics first.' I hope that's what he tells Brendan. Mr ALBANESE R36 In other places, such as the National Cabinet— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom is warned. Mr ALBANESE R36 this was an issue on which adults sat around and worked through the complex issues that are there as a result of the global issues that are arising from the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Opposition members interjecting— Mr ALBANESE R36 I hear interjections about supply. I hope that the member for Bowman also tells Brendan that four gigs left the system and one gig came in. That's why, on their watch—I don't blame the member for Bowman, because he wasn't there. His esteemed predecessor occupied that seat. I hope he also says that supply, when it comes to a new gas project, a new power station of any sort whatsoever, powered by anything you can think of—if you think that can go from idea, to planning approval, to financing, to construction and to delivery in terms of supply— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom is on a warning. Mr ALBANESE R36 you are showing how not real you are. You had something real before you last December, and you voted against it. Ukraine 534 14:52 Mr 299174 Bennelong LAXALE () (): My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. How is the Albanese Labor government continuing to support Ukraine in defending against Russia's illegal and immoral invasion? 14:52 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio I thank the member for his question. Last week the Minister for Foreign Affairs and I had the absolute privilege of meeting Australian Defence Force personnel who were providing training to new recruits of the Armed Forces of Ukraine as part of a UK initiative in England. On many occasions, the Leader of the Opposition and I have seen our own Defence Force personnel being put through their paces, and it's always impressive. They are training to build their skills and their capabilities for a range of scenarios that they might face in the future, but there is a certain distance between the training that is done and what the training is for. Here, it was completely immediate. Everyone knew where these recruits were going. We watched a drill where the recruits walked through a field. In this scenario one stood on a mine, and immediately the rest froze because where there is one mine there might be another. They pulled out a small metal rod and started probing the ground around them to establish a safe perimeter. Then there was artillery fire. They immediately hit the ground in the prone position, adopting the smallest profile. We were advised that this is exactly what's going on in Ukraine right now. I watched one of them, face down on his stomach with one foot over the other, with the kind of shaking, nervous twitch that you might see with a student who was deeply engrossed in doing an exam. These people could not have been more engaged in this activity. They were absorbing this knowledge as though their lives depended on it, because, of course, their lives do. I spoke to a number of the Australian trainers who do this kind of training each and every day back home but had never done training like this. They absolutely understood the seriousness of this moment and the consequence of what they were doing. All of us should feel proud. I had the enormous honour of speaking to a number of these Ukrainian recruits. On New Year's Day this year—think about what we were doing on that day, just a few weeks ago—they were a builder, a driver, a clerk, with about as much military experience as me, and yet here they all were, wearing their nation's uniform, ready to fight on behalf of their family, on behalf of their country and, in many respects, on behalf of us. What's at issue in Ukraine is the very sanctity of the global rules based order which is the foundation of our security. They were completely aware of the brutality of the conflict in which they were about to engage, which resembles World War I more than World War II. The appalling thought that we all had, which they all knew, was that if you applied the casualty rates the Ukrainian forces have experienced of the last few months to the cohort we were looking at, a significant number of them were about to meet their maker in the coming months, and yet they were there. This was one of the most poignant scenes I have ever witnessed. It was completely inspirational. I know that, whatever those people are about to face in the months ahead, they do so with the complete and total support of every member of this House. 14:56 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson on indulgence—Firstly, I want to congratulate the Minister for Defence for being there and supporting our troops. The work that they undertake in our country's name is recognised by countries around the world. Our partners, our allies, have stood shoulder to shoulder with the men and women of the Australian Defence Force in battles near and far, and our reputation is revered around the world. I had the great honour of visiting some of the troops in Lavarack Barracks in the member for Herbert's electorate not too long ago, and they had been on a similar training exercise to provide support, particularly around the gifting of some of the vehicles to the soldiers in Ukraine. You could see in their relaying of the story a similar account to that the Minister for Defence just gave. They knew what they were doing was tangible and that it counted. They knew they were preparing people to defend themselves against a brutal regime that didn't know the boundaries of decency by which our soldiers abide. The brutality—not just brutality towards soldiers but the wholesale slaughter of men and women and children in Ukraine this very day—is a tragedy we haven't seen in recent times. The depravity of Putin and those around him is rightly called out, most recently by our Prime Minister. The Australian public should know that we stand absolutely united as parliament in support of the work the government is undertaking. I am incredibly proud that we were able to provide $285 million worth of defence materiel when we were in government to Ukrainian forces at the request of President Zelenskyy, and we will continue to provide that support because the world, more than ever, needs to hear from nations like Australia. The values the minister rightly spoke of need be asserted in our region and in Europe. The work that President Zelenskyy is doing—a modern-day Churchill. His meetings with Prime Minister Sunak and the way in which Germany and others are providing support is a great credit to like-minded countries. We very proudly stand with them, and we always will. Minister for Communications 535 14:59 Ms DANIEL 008CH Goldstein My question is to the Minister for Communications. In the context of the current inquiry into online gambling reform, could the minister confirm reports that Sportsbet paid for a campaign dinner and made a second large donation to her campaign before the election? Could the responsible minister explain how such a donation is not a conflict of interest with an inquiry on foot and deep community concern about online gambling and gambling advertising, which are both under her portfolio? 14:59 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I thank the member for her question. I have and will continue to comply with the disclosure requirements of the AEC, the Register of Members Interests' and the ministerial code of conduct. The rules for disclosures must be complied with by every member of this place. On harm minimisation: my record and Labor's both in opposition and in government is strong. We are committed to reducing harms from online gambling, and we are implementing a national self-exclusion register. Housing 535 15:00 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid My question is to the Minister for Housing and Homelessness. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering on its commitment to ensure more Australians have a safe, affordable place to call home? 15:00 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I want to thank the member for Reid for her question and also for holding a roundtable in her electorate for me to attend with housing and homelessness service providers, because of course she, like everyone on this side of the House, understands that safe, affordable housing is central to the security and dignity of all Australians. We know how many Australians are doing it tough. We know this because we see and we hear it every day. We have Australians dealing with rising rents, increasing homelessness and, of course, homeownership out of reach for ordinary Australians. Our housing challenges are now widespread, and they're visible for all to see. But today marks a turning point. Today I introduced the government's legislative package to deliver on our election commitment to ensure more Australians have a safe, affordable place to call home. The $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund is the single biggest investment in social and affordable housing by a federal government in more than a decade. Returns from this fund will be the principal mechanism to deliver on the government's commitment that we put to the people at the last election, a commitment to build 20,000 new social homes and 10,000 affordable homes in the first five years of the fund. We've also introduced legislation to establish the National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, which will provide independent advice to government and governments on options to increase housing supply across the country. It will provide independent and expert advice on the right policies and the levers needed to address housing affordability. We want to get more homes on the ground more quickly, but we need to make sure they're the right homes in the right places. Of course, we also introduced our legislation to establish Housing Australia as the principal Commonwealth agency for delivering new homes on the ground: homes in our cities, homes in our regional towns and homes in remote Australia. But, of course, these reforms build on the actions that we have already taken. Last year we unlocked up to $575 million in funding from the National Housing Infrastructure Facility to invest in more social and affordable homes. Here are some examples of some of the projects I've recently announced: more than 130 new apartments in Adelaide, more than 300 dwellings in Westmead and up to 180 homes in north-west Tasmania. We've brought forward our commitments to regional Australians with our Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee and have over 1,700 Australians now in their first home. Of course, this builds on the Housing Accord that was announced in the last budget, where we will work with industry, with the sector and with state, territory and local governments. The Australian government is providing an additional $350 million for 10,000 more affordable homes. We're delivering on our agenda. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Deakin will cease interjecting immediately. There is far too much noise. Energy 536 15:03 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the Prime Minister. Alan; his wife, Maureen; and their 56-year-old son with a disability, David, in my electorate of Wannon were told last month that their energy bill will increase by approximately $1,360 over the next 12 months. Prime Minister, why do Australian families always pay more under Labor? 15:04 Mr ALBA R36 Grayndler NESE (—) (): I thank the member for Wannon for his question. We're still none the wiser as to what his portfolio is! I'm happy to receive the question, but the questioner would have more credibility if he had voted in favour of energy price relief. He had an opportunity to vote for lower prices; he voted for higher prices. I note AGL's statement to the Australian Stock Exchange, he voted for higher prices, and I note AGL's statement to the Australian Stock Exchange, notably: … the impact of government intervention contributed to a sharp decline in forward electricity prices. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Wannon, on a point of order? Mr Tehan 210911 No. I seek leave to table a letter from Alan to the Minister for Energy and Climate pointing out that his bill will go up by $1,300 and— The SPEAKER 53517 Is leave granted? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting. I call the Leader of the House. Mr Burke DYW The procedure under standing orders for the tabling of documents during question time under practice is: if there is a document that the minister is referring to. This is not a document that the Prime Minister was referring to. Leave's not granted, and it's not what the procedure's there for. The SPEAKER 53517 We're just going to move on. There's no point of order. I give the call to the member for Blair. Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme 536 15:06 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My question is to the Minister for Government Services. At the recent public hearings of the royal commission into robodebt, what have we learned about the former coalition government's shameful robodebt scheme? 15:06 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong I'd like to express gratitude to the work of the robodebt royal commission so far for uncovering evidence which would not have otherwise been available to the Australian people. Some of that evidence shows that, by the middle of 2017, the former coalition government was well and truly aware of robodebt's many problems. As I updated the House yesterday, there were literally tens of thousands of articles in the media, several hundred mentions in parliament and countless representations made to MPs and senators on all sides; there was the missing million-dollar report, which was shelved, inconveniently, before it could be provided, but, most importantly, the former government were on notice from the victims bravely sharing their own stories. Despite this, I can advise that, from 1 July 2017, a total of 764,000 Australians who had received welfare payments in the past were unlawfully accused of defrauding the government and slapped with robodebt notices. Of these, 438,000 were subsequently notified that there was an apparent discrepancy during the scheme but did not have a debt raised against them. However, the remaining 416,000 Australians were still issued unlawful robodebts after July 2017. If the coalition government had heeded these repeated, numerous, well-documented warnings and stopped the robodebt scheme at that stage, 764,000 of our fellow Australians would never have been subjected to this stressful, unlawful behaviour by their own government. Not only did the Morrison government continue with this illegal scheme for more than three years until it was only eventually stopped by a class action in November of 2020; we know from evidence at the recent hearings of the royal commission that they were continually dismissive of the warnings. What if the Morrison government had not ignored the repeated warnings? What if they had actually published the $1 million report? What if they had heeded the pleas of the victims? Could this illegal scheme have ended in July 2017? We will never know— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fremantle is warned. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order? Mr Fletcher L6B Again, this minister is trespassing into the territory that you have rightly warned against, drawing conclusions, which is the work of the royal commission rather than reporting on evidence, and the risk is that this creates an impression of prejudicing the work of the royal commission, because the minister is saying publicly what he wants— The SPEAKER 53517 I reminded the House and the minister yesterday that I was uncomfortable about members and ministers giving their opinions—and I asked them to refrain—about the evidence. I asked the minister to continue with his answer to make it clear to the House that he was referring to evidence within the royal commission. Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Despite the protestations of the opposition, it is a fact that the scheme was illegal. It is a fact that 764,000 Australian citizens—who pay the opposition's wages, by the way—were unlawfully served with debt notices. The point that really remains, in conclusion, is simply this. The architects of robodebt believed that the ends justified the means. The only remaining question for me is: when will all the architects at the top of the robodebt tree take full accountability and take full culpability and responsibility for the most illegal administrative scheme run by any government in the history of the Commonwealth? Pensions and Benefits 537 15:10 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack My question is to the Prime Minister. Labor's decision to scrap the cashless debit card has led to an increase in crime, gambling, alcohol fuelled violence and child neglect. I'm receiving reports from locals in the town of Kununurra that schoolchildren who would otherwise have had money set aside for their canteen lunches are now going hungry. This was often the only meal that they would have had that day. When will this Labor government recognise that their reckless move to scrap the cashless debit card is leading to poorer outcomes in some of our country's most vulnerable communities? 15:11 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I thank the member for her question. I would like to first acknowledge that in the Kimberley region there has been extensive flooding and there's been a lot of disruption. I am aware that there's been an influx of people into larger communities across the Kimberley due to the impacts of the recent severe floods, which have caused evacuations and significant damage. Opposition members interjecting— Ms RISHWORTH HWA Those opposite might think the flooding events in the Kimberley are a joke, but they are not. They are not. I firstly want to acknowledge all those who have been impacted by this severe flooding across the Kimberley region, and my thoughts are with those who are starting to recover. Recovering from these events will take a significant time. The opposition has shown real desperation now, I think—to link the influx of people, the dislocation of people and the array of issues that are faced by the people of Broome, Derby and Kununurra as a result of these floods. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Longman does not need to assist. I give the call to the member for Durack on a point of order. Ms Price 249308 Relevance: the people of the East Kimberley simply want to know whether you will acknowledge the recklessness of your decision— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. That is close to an abuse of the standing order, but out of respect for the member for Durack she may remain in the chamber. Ms RISHWORTH HWA I do understand that, as a result of and connected to the disruption and dislocation of many people across the region as well as the disruption of policing services, there has been a rise in antisocial behaviour in Broome, Derby and Kununurra. Two of these places were never subject to the cashless debit card. Of course, from this side of the House we are going to continue to deliver the supports that people need, including the Minister for Emergency Services delivering improvements across the board to support those recovering and to ensure that those throughout the Kimberley region, including in the East Kimberley, get the supports and services that make a difference and that they need. Importantly, I want to recognise that we have locked in ongoing funding for a range of support services like children's and parents' support services. Australian Constitution 537 15:14 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Australians. What progress has been made towards recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the Constitution and including an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice? 15:14 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I thank the member for Higgins for her question and recognise her passion for this issue. In the second half of this year, a referendum will be held on constitutional recognition. The 2023 referendum will be about two things: recognition and consultation—recognition of the 65,000 years of connection to country, and consultation through the Voice, because listening to communities means better policies and better outcomes. The justice reinvestment program in Bourke, New South Wales, is a good example. It's making a real difference in people's lives. Over time, the town has reduced family violence, reduced juvenile offences and reoffending and increased year 12 retention rates. The Referendum Working Group met last week. I am pleased that the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Berowra attended the working group meeting. The working group is guiding the government on the question, the constitutional amendments and the design principles of the Voice. Their recommendations will be given to government by the end of February, paving the way for a constitution alteration bill to be introduced in the next month or two. This will not be a third chamber, it will not have a veto power and it will not have a permanent seat at the National Cabinet. However, last week every state and territory leader signed a statement of intent to support recognition through the Voice. The National Cabinet is backing the Voice, and, as Premier Perrottet said, it is a matter of principle. One man who knows the truth is Galarrwuy Yunupingu, a Gumatj leader from north-east Arnhem Land, an elder and a very significant person in this country—in fact, an Australian of the Year. If Galarrwuy were here, he would remind us that the future is our responsibility. All who are here today will be asked for their leadership so that, in the words of Galarrwuy, someday we can all say: 'This is our country. It is a country we are all proud of. We now rejoice and celebrate with our Indigenous brothers and sisters.' In closing, can I say: I want everyone in this chamber to think how they will feel the Sunday morning after a successful referendum. We will be proud, and we will stand true and tall as Australians. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice 538 15:17 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, the government is committed to a referendum that, if successful, will establish a single body in our Constitution. What aspects of the Calma-Langton report will the government adopt if Australians vote yes for the Voice referendum? 15:18 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for his question, and I thank him for the work that he's done over a long period of time in supporting a Voice to this parliament, including on the committee of which he was the joint chair along with Senator Patrick Dodson, a great Australian. I have read that report. It's a substantial contribution. The committee was established by the former government, but in a bipartisan way, as a result of the Uluru Statement from the Heart in 2017, which was itself, as you are aware, the end of a five-year process of consultation. After that report, of course, Calma and Langton produced their report. The member wasn't a member of the former cabinet, but we know from Ken Wyatt, who has my utmost respect—the former minister for Indigenous affairs in this place, who had the great honour of being the first Aboriginal Australian to hold that position—that it did go to the cabinet not once but twice previously. I have read that report. It's a substantial report. It indicates the principles that had been established then by the Referendum Working Group, which, as the member would be aware, has outlined eight principles going forward as well. I would point this out: in terms of the process or way that constitutional change occurs, the Constitution outlines the principle, as the member would be aware—and I'd encourage him to read Justice French's contribution on the Constitution. But the member is a participant, not an observer. This is not the government's idea; this is an idea that has come from the bottom up, that the former government was responsible for. Let me say this: in March, legislation will be introduced— Opposition members interjecting— Mr R36 Do they want to listen? The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Groom is on a warning, and others will shortly follow if this unacceptable noise continues. I give the call back to the Prime Minister. Mr ALBANESE R36 In March, legislation will be introduced to this parliament. Then a committee will be established—and I am open to the form of that committee. I want to maximise support for this referendum. I'm not here to say, 'This is the government's position; take it or leave it.' I want to engage genuinely. I have met with the Leader of the Opposition on no fewer than six occasions. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister for infrastructure! Mr ALBANESE R36 This is not for the government. This is for the people of Australia. An opposition member interjecting— Ms Catherine King 00AMR This is not normal legislation. You're an idiot! The SPEAKER 53517 I will hear from the member for Wannon. Mr Tehan 210911 The member for Ballarat made a very unparliamentary remark and she should withdraw. The SPEAKER 53517 To assist the House, I call the member for Ballarat. Ms Catherine King 00AMR I withdraw. The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister has the call. Mr ALBANESE R36 (Extension of time granted) I say this to everyone in the chamber. In March, when the legislation is introduced, we will have a committee process. It won't be a government process; it will be a process of this parliament. I want the coalition to participate in it. I want the crossbench to participate in it. I want to maximise support for this. I make an offer here to the opposition to participate in that process in goodwill. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Bowman is warned. Mr ALBANESE R36 Part of that will be the development of further detail beyond the principles that have been established by the referendum working group. Then, if the referendum is successful, there will be a process in which, again, I will seek as much bipartisanship as possible. The goodwill that's been shown by the government—for example, members of the opposition, including some who are now in this chamber, approached government members who were working on the committee about the referendum structure—not the second bill but the first bill now before the Senate—and said that, for them, the publication of a booklet was important and would make a difference. So we agreed. I was approached last week. I spoke with the minister, Senator Farrell. I spoke with the minister for indigenous affairs, and we conveyed very clearly, our support for that. That wasn't our starting position, but this process cannot be one of Labor versus Liberal. We have to rise above this, and I respect the fact— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Hume! If there is one more interjection, people will leave the chamber. I give the call to the Prime Minister. Mr ALBANESE R36 I ask those opposite to join me in having an open mind but importantly an open heart when it comes to these issues. My colleague the minister just spoke about how Australians who had supported this change would feel the day after a referendum if it's successful. I ask you to think about the counterfactual as well—how Indigenous Australians will feel if it's not successful, how Australians will feel and how Australia is perceived internationally, including by our economic partners in the region. This is a major issue. I cannot do more than stand here, in this parliament, and offer a genuine engagement in order to achieve a positive outcome. I think there are people of good will in faith groups, in sporting organisations, in the business community and in civil society groups but, most importantly, among Indigenous Australians themselves who want this change and have waited a long time. And I say this: if we do not recognise Indigenous Australians in our Constitution this year, when will we? When will we? The SPEAKER 53517 I'll call the Leader of the Opposition on indulgence, but I'll be listening carefully to what he says. 15:25 Mr 00AKI Dickson DUTTON (—) (): Thank you, Mr Speaker. We were very happy to grant an extension of time for the Prime Minister on a very important topic. I think the first point to make in response to the Prime Minister's answer is that every Australian Prime Minister has a big heart and wants to see an improved situation for Indigenous Australians. There's no moral high ground here. There's no lecturing to take place. Every Australian wants to see a better outcome for Australians, starting with those little boys and girls in Alice Springs at the moment who are living an unimaginable life. So nobody occupies the high moral ground here. We have approached the situation—this proposal put by the government—in good faith. The Prime Minister made reference to a bipartisan arrangement, which included the member for Berowra, over a period of time. It included, over the prime ministerships of Gillard, of Abbott, of Turnbull and of Morrison, a bipartisan approach. And there was legitimate engagement. It resulted in us taking a policy to the last election which allowed for a local and regional voice, because we demonstrated that we wanted to hear, listen and act upon those local Indigenous elders and women and the voices that they were providing to the Australian public, in terms how their communities could be improved. That was our approach. Since the election, there has been no bipartisan engagement in terms of the approach around the legislation. The government took an initial position, in relation to the mechanism bill, that there would be no booklet distributed to Australians, where, particularly for Australians where English is not their first language, people wanted to sit down and read the 'no' and the 'yes' case, to be informed in terms of the decision that they were being asked to make about changing our Constitution. Australians in their millions, at the moment, have goodwill and have an approach which I think is reflected in the view that we have taken constructively as an opposition—that is, they want to understand the detail that the Prime Minister's proposing. There's no sense in saying that this is somebody else's process and we've just come along as an observer in relation to it. The fact is that people want detail. The very reasonable question asked by the member for Berowra earlier was whether the report, constantly referred to by the Prime Minister—the Calma-Langton report of 272 pages—is being adopted by the government. The Prime Minister, again today, refused to answer that question. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! I ask the Leader of the Opposition to conclude his indulgence. Mr DUTTON 00AKI Hence the confusion and lack of detail that is confusing for Australians. If the Prime Minister is after an outcome, the approach at the moment is not going to lead to that outcome. The SPEAKER 53517 I'm asking him to conclude his indulgence. The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Home Affairs will remain silent. Administrative Appeals Tribunal 540 15:28 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor My question is to the Attorney-General. How is the Albanese Labor government reforming our federal administrative review system and cleaning up the coalition's mess? 15:28 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs I thank the member for Lalor for her question. The shameless stacking of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal by those opposite is well known. The former government installed as many as 85 former Liberal MPs, failed Liberal candidates, former Liberal staffers and other close associates of the Liberal Party, without any merit based selection process, on salaries worth hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money. I'm very pleased to see that the former Attorney-General Senator Cash, one of the ministers responsible for that shameless stacking, has joined us in the chamber. This has had serious consequences for those Australians who rely on the AAT to review government decisions, which often have huge, life-altering impacts. It might be a person with a disability who's seeking support through the NDIS or a veteran who's seeking compensation for a service injury. Thanks to the former government's shameless stacking, the AAT has become dysfunctional, with extraordinarily large and growing backlogs causing delays of many months and, in some areas, even years. It's unacceptable. It is another mess left by the former government, which the Albanese government has wasted no time in cleaning up. On 16 December last year, I announced that we would abolish the AAT and replace it with a new administrative review body that will be composed of members who have been chosen through a transparent and merit based appointment system—unlike the stacking process used by the former government, of which the last practitioner was Senator Cash. We will ensure Australia's system of administrative review serves the interests of all Australians, not just the interests of the Liberal Party. It won't be a Liberal Party job agency as it was under those opposite and as it was under Senator Cash. And, unlike those opposite, we will deliver on the promises we make. COVID-19: Aged Care 540 15:31 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister confirm that there were more COVID related deaths in residential aged care in the last eight months under your government than in the first 2½ years of the pandemic under the coalition? 15:31 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I'll ask the Minister for Health and Aged Care to add to this answer, but what I can confirm is that every single death in aged care is a tragedy. Every single human being is someone who was someone's mum or dad or grandfather or grandmother or brother or sister, and it is tragic. I take the opportunity as well to pay tribute to the workers in aged care, who do such an extraordinary job. In particular, over the last few years, the pressure that they've been under because of the COVID pandemic is quite extraordinary. What the government has done is to work across different levels of government to take the appropriate health advice and to put in place the measures that have been continued in aged care with regard to PPE and appropriate health measures, respecting the fact that people in aged care are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of COVID. The COVID pandemic continues to impact Australians. We have changed the response to it, I think, in an appropriate way but are continuing to make sure that we prioritise assisting people who are in the most vulnerable circumstances. 15:33 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh Thank you, Prime Minister, and I thank the member for the question. This is obviously the source of a great deal of tragedy and distress for many hundreds of families as we get towards the back end of this latest wave—the fourth omicron wave. I indicated yesterday that there had been a little more than 800 deaths in residential aged care since October, when this fourth wave started, and about 2,600 deaths over the course of the wave. That is a great tragedy. We are learning through every wave how better to protect the most vulnerable members of our community, which is really the couple of hundred thousand people who live in residential aged care. We continue to put in place the protections that were started by the former government—strong workforce support; the deployment of rapid antigen tests, which are submitted by visitors and staff alike before they enter; masks and other PPE that the Prime Minister talked about; and, very importantly, the deployment of antiviral medicines that are so effective at preventing severe disease. The mortality rate for residential aged care over this wave has been that about one in 40 residents who catch COVID has died with it. It was about one in 30 over the course of the other waves in 2022 and about one in three in the early part of the pandemic. It's still a great tragedy but a tragedy that we are continuing to learn from, not just here in Australia but right around the world. Modernising Business Registers 541 15:34 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa My question is to the Assistant Treasurer. What has the Albanese Labor government discovered about the Modernising Business Registers program since coming into office and how is the government responding to those discoveries? 15:35 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam It's important because it consolidates over 30 government business registers into one place and puts them under the control of the Australian Tax Office, which will manage these programs. It's an important program for businesses because it means that their interactions with government are made more efficient—saving money—but also ensuring that users of those businesses are able to access important information, such as the identification of directors or the locations of businesses, important in all sorts of programs and processes, including in insolvency processes. At the time of its establishment, the government told us that this project was going to cost $480 million—a lot of money, but we thought that was going to be enough to make the project successful. On coming into government, we were briefed almost immediately that the program was woefully underfunded. Emergency funds were allocated to the Australian Tax Office to attempt to see the project over a fiscal cliff, which was fast approaching. We then asked them to give us a detailed analysis of how much the entire project was going to cost. The cost envelope kept moving and moving and moving. We are now aware that, instead of this project in total costing somewhere around $480 million, as we were informed by the former Assistant Treasurer, the project will cost in excess of $1.5 billion. That is a billion dollar blowout in the cost of this program. Day after day, members of the coalition come into this place and ask that we, as the government, pay recognition for their excellent record of economic management. The fact is that they were incompetent economic managers that left us with a trillion dollars worth of debt and program after program unfunded and unable to be delivered, and this is just another one of them. The businesses, including the small businesses of Australia, deserve much better than this—an incompetent government and an incompetent opposition. (Time expired) Mr Albanese R36 Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE 541 STATEMENTS ON INDULGENCE Turkiye: Earthquake 541 15:38 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I am deeply saddened to have been given a report during question time that one Australian has tragically lost their life in the devastation that has occurred in Turkiye and Syria. The House will understand I cannot speak further on this until the appropriate steps have taken place, which I notified the Leader of the Opposition of. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade continues to provide consular assistance to Australians unaccounted for, of whom tragically there are a number at this point in time. Their safety is our immediate priority, and we understand how difficult the situation is for their loved ones back here. We have, of course, provided the initial support of $10 million, but we are also hopeful that soon the Australian personnel, who have such experience, unfortunately, of dealing with tragedies and natural disasters, will be on the ground in the region. Our thoughts are with all those who have loved ones back in Turkiye, Syria and in the region. Our hope is that good news presents itself by the time we come back to the chamber here next week. DOCUMENTS 542 DOCUMENTS Presentation 542 15:40 Mr BURKE DYW Watson Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. Parliamentary Service Commissioner 542 Presentation 542 15:40 The SPEAKER 53517 I present the annual report of the Parliamentary Service Commissioner for 2021-22. Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper. AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS 542 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS Reports Nos 12 and 13 of 2022-23 542 15:40 The SPEAKER 53517 I present Auditor-General's reports Nos 12 and 13 of 2022-23: report No. 12—2021-22Major Projects report: Department of Defence; and report No. 13—Annual performance statements audit—Audits of the annual performance statements of Australian government entities—2021-22: Across entities. Documents made parliamentary papers. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION 542 PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION Valedictory 542 15:40 Mr TUDGE M2Y Aston on indulgence—I would like to inform the House that I'll be resigning from parliament effective from next week. I informed the Prime Minister and the Speaker of my decision earlier today, and the Leader of the Opposition has known of my likely intent since early January, when my decision was cemented following the passing of my father. It has not been an easy decision for me, but it is necessary for my health and for my family, amongst other reasons. I certainly have not taken this decision lightly. My daughters, who are 18 and 16, know nothing other than their dad being away. They've had to put up with things that no teenager should have to, including death threats, the most recent of which was last week. My son is a bit younger, but I equally want to be a good father to him. While this profession can be unforgiving at times, serving as a member of parliament has been one of the greatest honours of my life. As a local member I've had opportunities to work with thousands of individuals and groups to advance our community, from Foothills Community Care to the Boronia football club. I've had the privilege of meeting and recognising volunteers who have done 20 or more years of quiet work just helping others—the true heroes of our nation. This alone makes a role as a representative not just worthwhile but immensely rewarding, and it's why I continue to encourage others to consider pursuing it. I thank the people of Aston for putting their faith in me and giving me that responsibility. In addition, I've been fortunate to have been given ministerial responsibilities, and I was equally fortunate in my timing. I've had just one term in opposition and nine years on the front bench in government, including being in the Morrison cabinet. My passion has always been in social policy rather than economic or security policy, the traditional Liberal focal areas. I've always believed that, while the economy is the foundation of our society, social policies determine whether individuals are given the opportunity and responsibility to realise their potential. Both of these things are required: opportunity and responsibility. That's something that I learned deeply from working with Noel Pearson. That's why I've been passionate about working with colleagues in this House to lead policy reforms over the years, such as strengthening the sustainability of our social security systems, including through stronger job search obligations, which in part have led to the lowest welfare dependency ratio in decades. We codesigned the cashless welfare card with Indigenous leaders, to be implemented in areas where welfare fuelled alcohol abuse was robbing women and children of their safety, let alone a reasonable life. There is still so much work to do in this area, as Alice Springs is showing. We implemented policies to support social cohesion and strengthen our successful model of integrated multiculturalism, including encouraging the learning of English and providing unlimited free tuition to do so as well as countering some of the CCP misinformation. We made reforms to online gambling, including banning lines of credit, and brought in other new consumer protections, some of which are still being implemented now. My greatest passion, though, was and is education. I would have loved more time leading that portfolio, but I know that many of our initiatives are being supported by the Albanese government. For example, I'm pleased that legislation has been reintroduced to enact the research commercialisation agenda, which the Business Council of Australia described as 'crucial for our economic success for decades to come'. Equally so, the reforms to initial teacher education, which are absolutely fundamental to lifting school standards. Similarly, the expansion of Teach For Australia, the rolling out of explicit instruction in remote schools and the encouragement of high-fee independent schools to partner with Indigenous ones—all are important. I thank Minister Jason Clare for the constructive manner he has taken to these programs. I don't expect the Labor government to be quite as passionate as me about reforming the school curriculum to present a more positive, optimistic view of our nation, but I certainly encourage the government down that path. Speaker, as you know, nothing in this place can be achieved alone. I've had incredible support from so many. To start with, I've had brilliant staff in my office over the years, no more so than the leaders of my electorate office, who were with me almost my entire time, Glynis Allan and Sandra Rae, but also Nicole Fewson, Jessica White, Sam Rebecci, Rachel Dryden, Michael Bennett, Boronia Blow and so many others. I have friends and loved ones who have always been in my corner, and they know who they are. I've had colleagues who are now incredible friends. I've had the benefit of a professional public service. To all of you, I simply say: thank you. I also thank the Prime Minister and the Speaker for the grace that they have shown me. I especially thank Peter Dutton, Scott Morrison and Tony Abbott for their leadership, support and strength. Peter Dutton is a man of incredible integrity, experience and strength, and I greatly admire him. He would make an excellent Prime Minister. I thank the Liberal Party and the thousands of members that the party comprises, locally headed by the amazing Paul Stone. Our values are as timeless and true today as when Menzies articulated them. Moreover, the future is bright for our side of politics when we are still recruiting people of the talent of Zoe, Keith and Aaron—just to mention the three Victorians who came in at the last election. I'll just grab a glass of water. Sorry. Just bear with me for a second. I'll just take a breath. Finally, I thank my family. I've got water everywhere now! I want to thank my family particularly, and particularly my kids: Cass, Krissy and Richard, who I'm so very proud of. I'm proud to see my son flourish in his early primary school years and proud to see my daughters grow into being strong, independent woman. I leave honoured to have served and proud of what we have achieved both for the people of Aston and across Australia, but particularly for Indigenous Australia. There is always much more work to do, and there are always new faces in this place. I believe that the Liberal Party is well served by the emerging talent in Aston, and it is time to pass the baton to someone who can hopefully serve our local community better than anyone before them. It truly has been an honour and a privilege to be a member of this place. I thank the House. 15:49 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Aston for showing respect to this parliament, to this House, by announcing his resignation on the floor of the House of Representatives. That's appropriate, and it's consistent with his decision to inform me. We had a meeting this morning, where he informed me of his decision to leave the parliament. Serving in this House is an incredible honour for all of us, and this is a difficult day and a difficult decision for the member for Aston to come to. We had a good discussion this morning, not least of which was about the conscripts—our children, in particular—and about how difficult it is for our children, who are sometimes exposed to what should never occur, particularly at a time when people can make anonymous comments through social media and through other forms. The member for Aston has been very lucky. He has had one term in opposition and three terms as a minister. I'm in my third term as a minister, and I've been here since last century. So I say to the member for Aston: we had political differences—I'm not going to include some elements of his service; there's no point in gilding the lily there, and he wouldn't want me to either—but I thank him for his service in this House. I thank him for the sacrifices that are made to serve in this House. On behalf of the government, I say that I respect the decision that he has made and I respect the manner in which it has been made. 15:52 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson I thank the Prime Minister for his very gracious words. The Prime Minister and I have differences on all sorts of policies, but people should know that the Prime Minister is a person who greatly respects the institution of the parliament, as I do, and despite what might be said in the media and what might be reported of the perceptions of this chamber or conduct in this chamber, the fact is that it must survive and it must thrive, because we live in the greatest country in the world. We do so because there is a contest of ideas and the ability to exchange different ideas—in a robust way, on occasion, but always respecting those who have gone before us, those who have served, and making sure that this institution is in a fit state for those who will come in the years ahead. I want to say a few words about my friend the member for Aston, Alan Tudge. Alan came into the parliament in 2010. He is a person of great integrity, of huge intellect. He had a significant career and experiences over the course of working with Brendan Nelson, Alexander Downer and Noel Pearson and others within the private sector, which came to bear around our cabinet table and around our leadership group in discussions and in the party room. He does have a great intellect, an appetite for nothing more than seeing what is in our country's best interest. He dedicated himself to that during his time in Aston for the people in his local electorate. It's a great area, and he has been passionate about making sure that, whether it's local roads or projects in his local community, he has been a champion on behalf of those people. But his interests have extended nationally, and he's been very passionate in the area of Indigenous affairs and education in particular, and his contribution to public policy and to advancing the cause of Indigenous Australians and young Australians as their minds experiment, explore and grow has been his particular passion. The Prime Minister pointed out earlier that our families are conscripts in this business, and yes, they are. The Prime Minister and I have had conversations before about death threats against our own children, and there would be other members in the chamber who have had a similar experience. The online environment has created an opportunity for spineless people, people without the integrity of most decent Australians, who conduct themselves in a way that they should be ashamed of. It does bring an additional pressure not just to those family members but to us as parents, and there is a price that we pay for that. That's not peculiar to any side of the chamber. It's a reality for all of us in this chamber. We live in a robust democracy, as I say, and we should exchange ideas, but we should do it in a respectful way, particularly without seeking to inflict pain, harm or discord. Certainly, somebody who is as depraved as to think it's acceptable to go after the children of an elected member of parliament—we should completely and utterly condemn it, and the whole parliament speaks as one in doing that. Has there been pressure on the member for Aston? Of course there has. Has he felt that pressure, particularly with teenage girls? Absolutely. Is he a person who has absolute love and dedication for his children? Yes, he does, very proudly, and it's part of the reason that we're very proud of what he has been able contribute to the Liberal Party over a long period of time. We wish him well in the next chapter of his life. We wish him every success. We wish him well in his return to his family. When I spoke to him at Christmas he was devastated by his father's passing—just another layer, I suppose, of pressure that he has had to endure, and that's the reality of the situation. I can understand the decision that he has made. The Liberal Party is poorer for him moving on. We wish him and his family bright days ahead. As the Leader of the Liberal Party, on behalf of our members and on behalf of my colleagues here, we extend every best wish to Alan Tudge in the years ahead. Honourable members: Hear, hear! STATEMENTS 544 STATEMENTS Personal Explanation 544 15:56 Mrs ANDREWS 230886 McPherson Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation. The SPEAKER 53517 Do you claim to have been misrepresented? Mrs ANDREWS 230886 I do. The SPEAKER 53517 You may proceed. Mrs ANDREWS 230886 Yesterday, 8 February, at approximately 4.25 pm, the Minister for Home Affairs deliberately entered the chamber and sought to add to her answer in question time that day regarding when the Prime Minister's office was first informed that the designation of Nauru as a regional processing country had lapsed. With reference to me, the Minister for Home Affairs said: She— referring to me— was personally informed two days ago in a briefing with officials that the first time the Department of Home Affairs notified my office of the issue was late in the evening on 15 December. That is untrue. MOTIONS 544 MOTIONS Minister for Communications 544 15:58 Mr C2T Clark WILKIE () (): I seek leave to move the following motion: That the House: (1) notes that the Minister for Communications has responsibility for the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 and other relevant matters; (2) further notes that the Minister for Communications has received gifts and donations from the online gambling industry while Minister, and previously when Labor spokesperson on online gambling; (3) calls on the Minister to return to this place immediately and explain why she thinks her behaviour is acceptable and why she shouldn't resign as Minister, if that is her position; and (4) calls on the Prime Minister to intervene if the Minister refuses to stand down by enforcing the ministerial code of conduct and sacking her. Leave not granted. Mr WILKIE C2T I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Member for Clark from moving the following motion immediately— That the House: (1) notes that the Minister for Communications has responsibility for the Interactive Gambling Act 2001 and other relevant matters; (2) further notes that the Minister for Communications has received gifts and donations from the online gambling industry while Minister, and previously when Labor spokesperson on online gambling; (3) calls on the Minister to return to this place immediately and explain why she thinks her behaviour is acceptable and why she shouldn't resign as Minister, if that is her position; and (4) calls on the Prime Minister to intervene if the Minister refuses to stand down by enforcing the ministerial code of conduct and sacking her. There is an urgent need to deal with this matter, not just because of the seriousness of the matter but also because the minister is right now involved in consideration and work to do with the online gambling industry and online gambling companies. She can't sit in her office a moment longer, doing her work and making decisions about companies like Sportsbet, when we learned today that, in the lead-up to the last federal election, she received a gift of almost $9,000 from Sportsbet and, days before last year's federal election, she received a cash donation of $10,000 from Sportsbet. We cannot let the minister stay in her office one moment longer, making decisions about companies like Sportsbet, when we have these revelations, thanks to the Sydney Morning Herald this morning. Today's revelations are just the tip of the iceberg. When we look at the Register of Members' Interests for the interests of the Minister for Communications, we see a pattern of behaviour which, altogether, well and truly shows that she has poor judgement, has conflicts of interest and should not spend a moment longer as the Minister for Communications. For example, while she was the Labor spokesperson on communications, intimately involved in policy development about online gambling companies, she took tickets and hospitality from Tabcorp to go to the 2020 Everest event at Randwick Racecourse for herself and a guest. On another occasion, she enjoyed tickets and hospitality from Tabcorp for the 2019 Golden Eagle for herself and a guest. On another occasion, she enjoyed tickets and hospitality from Tabcorp to attend the 2020 Star Casino Hamilton Melbourne Cup. On another occasion, she received tickets and hospitality from Tabcorp for herself and four others to go to the Randwick races. She has enjoyed tickets and hospitality from the Star to attend Hamilton. Since becoming minister—these are much more serious matters—she has enjoyed tickets and hospitality for herself and four other guests from Tabcorp at the 2022 Melbourne Cup Carnival race day at Royal Randwick Racecourse. She has enjoyed tickets and hospitality for herself and four guests to go to the Australia versus UK rugby game as guests of Tabcorp. I could go on, but I think I've made the point. I've made the point, I hope, as clear as it needs to be made that the minister is completely and utterly conflicted. Even if she weren't so patently conflicted, she clearly has made such grievous errors of judgement that, surely, she's not fit to sit on the front bench as a minister in this government. It is so important that the minister come in here now and explain herself. Until she explains herself and perhaps successfully persuades us that all is not as it seems, we cannot have confidence in her as minister. We can't have her stay in her office a moment longer, making decisions about Tabcorp and the other gambling companies, when this cloud hangs over her. Surely, if the government is fair dinkum and the Prime Minister is fair dinkum about restoring integrity to this place—and I believe the Prime Minister is fair dinkum about restoring integrity in this place—then he will act decisively. He will act to dismiss the Minister for Communications from her portfolio if she doesn't have the good sense and, quite frankly, the honour to come in here and resign herself. And what about this code of conduct? Is that meant to mean anything? If the government does not act on that code of conduct—if the Prime Minister does not act on that code of conduct—when there has been such a serious breach of the code of conduct, then that code of conduct is worthless, completely and utterly worthless. In closing, can I just make a more general observation about the approach of all of us to the gambling industry. How on earth can anyone think it's okay, time and time again, to take donations and gifts from companies that prey on some of the most vulnerable people in our community? We talk about tobacco companies. In New South Wales they talk about property developers. How about we ban gifts from gambling companies, because at the end of the day they prey on the most vulnerable members of our community. How on earth the Minister for Communications thought she was acting with integrity to take $10,000 from a gambling company, Sportsbet, days before last year's election is unfathomable. It is absolutely unfathomable that anyone could be so naive about how that looks and how it really is. I'll wrap it up there and hopefully leave some time for some of my colleagues to contribute to this suspension motion. I'm sure they will agree with me that there's an urgent need to act on this matter. There's an urgent need for the Minister for Communications to explain herself and to step down. There's an urgent need to get her out of her office and to prevent her from continuing to make decisions about companies like Sportsbet, Tabcorp and all of the others that she has a legal responsibility to oversee and to regulate—companies that have directly funded her lifestyle and directly funded her electioneering. The SPEAKER 53517 Is the motion seconded? 16:06 Ms 008CH Goldstein DANIEL () (): I second the member for Clark's motion. I'd like to make the point that this is not in any way an effort to humiliate the minister or to create a witch-hunt. In my mind, this is about ethics, transparency and integrity. There are credible reports in the press that the minister received the donations that the member for Clark has referenced. The minister was asked about this by me in question time today. The minister did not answer the question. My aspiration is to get an answer to that question for this House and also for those in our communities who are incredibly concerned about problem gambling, about online gambling and about gambling advertising. Indeed, I would say that this is one of the most hot-button issues that I discuss. Whenever I raise it I am avalanched with people saying, 'Yes, we must do something about this.' In that context, with an inquiry on foot, it seems, at the very least, appropriate that we receive a proper explanation from the minister about these donations. Indeed, the opacity around the donations and the fact that the minister didn't have to declare them—we found out about them because of a declaration from the company that gave them, which was Sportsbet—says a lot about the system of donation transparency. The concern, to state the obvious, is that these kinds of donations can have a potential influence on decision-making. That can be very subtle. When a member is attending the kinds of events over time that the member for Clark referenced, that can lead to personal relationships and a slippage of the kinds of ethics and integrity that I'm talking about. Is this okay? Are we okay with members of this place receiving these kinds of donations from companies who prey on the most poor and vulnerable in our community and, not only them, our young people? I have a deep concern, and so do many members of my community, about the normalisation of gambling among our teenagers through online gambling, particularly through Sportsbet's broadcast advertising. These are the kinds of things that the inquiry is looking at. This is the kind of policy that the minister is going to have to make decisions on. Therefore, we need to get to the root of these donations and get an explanation from the minister. The minister needs to take this seriously. The minister needs to explain this not just to this House but to the Australian people. 16:09 Mr BURKE DYW Watson The government won't be supporting the resolution that's in front of us. I have enormous respect for both the mover and the seconder and understand their long-term commitment, both of them, for the whole time they've been here—and one of them, the member for Clark, has been here for a long time—to issues concerning problem gambling. In fact, one of the first things we heard about the member for Clark before the seat was renamed, after he'd been elected, was about acting on problem gambling. So, I have the deepest respect for the members. But I have to say, I think the conclusions that have been drawn in the speeches so far completely fail the test. I really do. And let me explain why. When you say that the minister has breached the Code of Conduct without quoting from the Code of Conduct, that's a bit of a giveaway. The minister was asked on the floor of the parliament and has already answered that every single requirement under the code that a minister has to abide by with respect to disclosure has been met, that every single requirement under the code that a minister is obliged to follow has been met. All donations that the minister receives are compliant with the disclosure requirements of the AEC, are compliant with the disclosure requirements of the Register of Members' Interests and are compliant with the disclosure requirements of the Ministerial Code of Conduct. Just as I have deep respect for the mover and the seconder here, let me say without a doubt that the Minister for Communications is a person of extraordinary ability and impeccable integrity. I have known the minister for many, many years. But also the test to the argument that's being put to the House is: how has the minister behaved with respect to problem gambling since becoming the minister? In every action the level of protection that the government is providing in terms of delivering stronger harm minimisation is something that is being led by the minister. So, the government is committed to reducing harms from online gambling. And who is the person leading that debate within the government? The Minister for Communications. The government strongly supports the implementation of the National Self-Exclusion Register. Who's the person leading that charge on the Self-Exclusion Register within the government? The Minister for Communications. We are committed to getting it done, and the Minister for Communications is the person driving that, making sure that we get that done. BetStop will allow consumers to exclude themselves from licensed phone and internet wagering. It's a critically important reform. It's something that I suspect the different donors who have just been referred to are not mad keen on. But the minister, as a person of integrity, driving an agenda within the Albanese Labor government, has not altered the principles that she holds one bit—not one bit. Nor is there any argument from the movers and the seconder of this resolution that she in fact has. The minister is also delivering reforms to reduce harm. The Minister for Communications has given her department clear and specific direction, which emphasises that the principle underpinning each stream of work must be about minimising harm. These sorts of principles are exactly the sorts of principles that I heard in speeches when the member for Clark first came into this parliament in 2010. And no-one has heard the Minister for Communications say anything different. For the allegation to be put, that simply because all disclosures had been met with—the fact that nothing was hidden, the fact that everything's been made public and the fact that she has pursued an agenda that has only taken policies of the Australian government further on harm minimisation—makes the case as to why this resolution should not be supported. The Minister for Communications is committed to guaranteeing that online gambling takes place under a robust legislative framework with strong consumer protections, including through the continued implementation of the national framework. For every issue that's been raised in the speeches, people have said, 'But the minister is responsible for this issue.' Yes, and she's doing more on harm minimisation. Then we hear, 'The Minister for Communications is responsible on another aspect of issues affecting gaming and gambling and problem gambling.' Yes, and what policies has she taken? In every sense, the policies that were the policies of the government of Australia before the last election have only been strengthened under the Minister for Communications. In terms of wanting to put this sort of resolution, which is an extraordinary resolution—normally we get to this point with some sort of a case having been built against someone, but the case is the exact opposite. If we had a minister who had been hiding information—and we've had a few debates like that over the years—that would be one argument. And yet we have no argument whatsoever that there is anyone who has fallen short on the disclosure requirements. We have no argument from anyone that a syllable of the code has been breached. We have no argument from anyone that there has been a moment in time when the Minister for Communications has made life easier for the gaming companies. If you can't make a case that the minister has behaved improperly in either the obligations that you have as a member or as a minister, and the only actions the minister has taken are the opposite of what the donors might have wanted, how on earth do we get to the point where we have a resolution like this before the parliament? There were many occasions over the last nine years when this question would come to me: 'Are we ready to move a resolution against this particular minister?' There were lots of times when we got there, but it was never a situation where they had kept every obligation under the code. It was never a situation where they had pursued the exact sorts of policies we wanted them to pursue. So to now be in a situation where someone of impeccable integrity and extraordinary ability is being subjected to a resolution like this, I simply have to say to the members who have moved and seconded this, for whom I continue to have the deepest respect, I do not see how this passes the tests that we have applied in this parliament for such a long time. I just don't see it. I respect absolutely that the members who have spoken so far and, I suspect, the members who will speak subsequently are members who are deeply passionate about the parliament wanting to do more on problem gambling. That is a right and proper thing for a member of parliament to want to pursue here in this place. I have no doubt about the integrity of the members who have spoken already and who will continue to speak in this debate, and about how they will take every opportunity to continue to pursue that cause to get a better deal for a whole lot of genuinely vulnerable people who are hurt by gambling. But this is an attack on minister where we can't actually find that they've done anything wrong, where we can't actually find any part of the code that the minister has breached, where we can't actually find any time when the donations that are being referred to actually had an impact on behaviour, where we can't find a single moment in time when a single disclosure that is obliged to occur failed to occur. Why on earth are we having this debate at all? By all means, move a suspension about problem gambling. Move a suspension putting pressure on the government and the opposition to do more on that issue. I get all of that. But this particular attack on the Minister for Communications fails none of the tests of merit that the crossbench traditionally would be decent adjudicators of. I respect absolutely the calls that have caused people to want to shine a light on problem gambling. But the Minister for Communications is a person who deserves better than this resolution. 16:20 Ms SHARKIE 265980 Mayo I have enormous respect for the Leader of the House. I would like to quote clause 3.21 from the ministerial code of conduct: Ministers must not seek or accept any kind of benefit or other valuable consideration either for themselves or for others in connection with performing or not performing any element of their official duties as a Minister. I think it's really important here when we look at conflict of interest—and that's what we're talking about here: conflict of interest, whether it is perceived or real. I, as a member of the crossbench, believe this to be real. How can it be acceptable for the minister who is responsible for online gambling to be responsible on one hand—and, yes, I'm sure the minister has in her plans duties to strengthen anti-gambling measures—and then on the other hand accept tickets and hospitality on multiple occasions, including twice already during this short-term of parliament? I would urge the Leader of the House to reflect on clauses 3.21 and 3.22 of the ministerial code of conduct. That is where we have concern. I commend the member for Clark for his work in raising this in the House. We want to see a parliament that is transparent and open. We want the Australian community to have confidence in us. Perhaps there is a desensitisation here, but it's incredibly important the minister has a separation between hospitality from gambling companies and her role as minister. I believe that clauses 3.21 and 3.22 have been breached in this regard, and it is a matter of urgency that the minister comes down to this chamber and explains herself. 16:22 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh As the Leader of the House said, the government will not be supporting this motion for the reasons he outlined. There's no demonstrated breach of any of the obligations we have as members of parliament, as candidates for election to the parliament or as ministers—the AEC disclosures, the disclosures in the register of interest and ministerial disclosure. There are a number of issues that I suspect lie behind this. The Leader of the House has reflected and recognised the commitment to action against problem gambling that a number of the members of the House have—perhaps most notably demonstrated by the career of the member for Clark, but so many members of the House have a background in action against problem gambling. We can have debates about that, as is happening right now in the New South Wales election. What also lies behind this is that a number of members, particularly on the crossbench, were elected on a strong agenda of transparency. Again, though, this is something the Labor Party has been arguing for for many years, going back to the Howard government. We have been arguing for strong reforms to AEC disclosure—unsuccessfully, I have to say, unfortunately—for lower thresholds for disclosure of donations and for real-time disclosure of donations. These are agendas that we as the Labor Party have been arguing for for many years. No person in this House has the sole responsibility for arguing for transparency. We've been doing this, and the Special Minister of State continues to say we will remain true to the commitments we have been making for years to improve transparency and disclosure of donations through the Electoral Commission legislation and the operations of the Electoral Commission. We've also been making that very clear in the statement of ministerial obligations. The Prime Minister has made clear from the day of our election as a new government that he intends to lead a government that has much stronger standards around ministerial disclosure than, frankly, has been demonstrated over the past nine years. Our ministers have been true to those standards and I don't think there's anything in the arguments that've been made in this short debate that indicate that the Minister for Communications has done otherwise. It is very clear: as the Leader of the House has said, she has not taken a backward step. It might not be the full action that the member for Clark and others on the crossbench would like around issues to do with gambling, and online gambling in particular, but she has not taken a backward step in this area. The SPEAKER 53517 The time for debate has concluded. The question is that the motion be disagreed to.    

The House divided. [16:29]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 70 AYES Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. McBride, E. M. McCormack, M. F. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Murphy, P. J. Neumann, S. K. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Pitt, K. J. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Scrymgour, M. R. Shorten, W. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Vamvakinou, M. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Zappia, A. 15 NOES Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Chaney, K. E. Daniel, Z. Haines, H. M. Le, D. Ryan, M. M. (Teller) Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Spender, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Tink, K. J. Watson-Brown, E. Wilkie, A. D. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to

 ADJOURNMENT 549 ADJOURNMENT Page Electorate: 2022 Floods 549 16:35 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page The 12-month anniversary of the natural disaster that devastated my community is coming up on 28 February. There are a number of events happening to commemorate this, including a medal presentation to thank what was dubbed 'our tinny army'. There's also been a short film made, called TinnyHeroes, which will be launched that week as well, and I want to talk about that film. Before I do, I want to remind the House of the circumstances that created this crisis. On Sunday night, 27 February, as people were going to bed the Bureau of Meteorology were predicting a flood of 11½ metres in Lismore. That's under the 12.2 metre record level, and people were confident. They'd prepared their businesses; they'd lifted stock. People had prepared homes, and they knew what level—literally what step—it would come up to at 11.5 metres if it came up the steps to their house. People in the early morning hours started to get woken by water streaming and gushing into their homes. The flood level, at about one to two in the morning, had been revised to 14.5 metres. That's three metres higher than what people thought when they were going to bed, and it was over two metres higher than we'd ever seen before. We did not have a flood happening; we had a natural disaster occurring, which we had never seen or experienced before. All this, in the dark of night. The immediate crisis was that thousands of people were at risk of drowning in their homes. People were scrambling into roof cavities and onto roofs. It was a desperate situation. Then, they arrived. Instinctively, intuitively, over 200 local heroes got into their tinnies, kayaks, jet skis and anything else that floated and started rescuing people, literally saving their neighbours', their friends' and their families' lives. Make no mistake, they were putting themselves at great risk. This was an angry, swollen river moving very quickly. It was dark, the storm still raging and the rain was falling heavily. But out they went, saving person after person, family after family. Four fatalities happened. They are all tragic, but it was a miracle there were so few. Susanna Freymark, who was an editor of Indy.com, an online news page, and her co-director Jimmy Malecki have produced a film telling just some of the courageous and miraculous stories. The flood moved through Lismore and went downstream and caused great destruction in villages such as Coraki, Woodburn, Broadwater, Wardell and others. Bob May, an 84-year-old from Woodburn—I know Bob very well—inspired Susanna to create the film because Bob approached Susanna and asked if she could put a call out on her website asking if anyone knew the identity of the two men that rescued him. So, through Susanna's call-out, Bob was able to meet and thank the two men that, as he said, saved his life. The two men were Derek Stratton and Marcus Smith. Bob was the last person they rescued that night in Woodburn. They'd already rescued about 40 people before they got Bob out just before daylight. I really want to thank Susanna and Jimmy for the job that they've done. There is going to be launch of this at Woodburn, which I'll be at on the night. I know that a lot of tears are going to be shed as we watch this, but it's important. It's important that in acknowledging the people who will feature in the film we are, in essence, acknowledging the hundreds of people who did things like them. These heroes are predominantly young men, and the majority of them are very humble. I put out a Christmas card last Christmas, and I also wanted to acknowledge the tinny army on at. I thank Luke and Todd and Danny and Nick who appeared on that. But I went to a number of them, including the young man called Matt Weir, who is the son of a friend of mine. Matt, who was turning 21 a few days later, went out and saved a lot of people on his jet ski. When I said, 'Matt, will you come on the Christmas card? I want to thank you and, in thanking you, thank the hundreds of people who did things like you.' He said: 'Kevin, I'd do anything for you, but I don't want to do that. I'm humble. I don't want to be publicly acknowledged for this. I just went out and did what I knew I had to do.' The film is going to open at Woodburn on 1 March. I'm looking forward to the opening of it. There are going to be screenings in Lismore from 2 to 4 March, in Coraki on 3 March and at the Commercial Hotel in Casino on 7 March. There'll be others, as well. I'm looking forward to the film. Thank you, Susannah; thank you, Jimmy; and thank you to our tinnie army. Child Care 550 16:40 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Children are our most precious resource. We know the first five years of a child's life are crucial. The early years shape the person we each become. When we invest in our children we invest in our future. That is why one of the most significant commitments Labor made to families across the nation at the last election was to cut the cost of child care. In November last year, the Albanese government delivered on that commitment, passing legislation through the parliament. The government's reform bill will cut the cost of child care for about 1.26 million families, and 96 per cent of families with children in early childhood education and care will benefit from this reform. The legislation gives children access to critical early education they may not have otherwise received. The cheaper child care reform is good for kids, good for families and good for our economy. Cheaper child care will help families with young children in rapid-growth areas like those in my electorate of Corangamite, such as suburbs like Charlemont, Ashbury Estate and Anchorage all within the high-growth area of Armstrong Creek, or in established areas with fast-growing estates, like Bannockburn, Grovedale, Leopold, Torquay and Ocean Grove. Young families in these areas know all too well the rising costs of child care, costs that have soared across the nation by 41 per cent in the past eight years. It's clear that parents, particularly women, want to make the best choices for their families around child care, early education and, importantly, workforce participation. Women want to choose to progress their career, develop their skills and earn more. Our child care reforms will help women to do this. There are some 6,000 families currently using approved child care within my electorate. Of those, some 5,800 will directly benefit from our government's cheaper child care. From July, our government will lift the maximum childcare subsidy rate to 90 per cent for families with a combined income of under $80,000. It will also increase subsidy rates for families earning less than $530,000 annually. Analysis by Treasury indicates this policy will mean up to 37,000 extra full-time workers in Australia, and they will be available for businesses in the next financial year. I've met many families in my electorate who have sat down with a calculator and figured out that, under current arrangements, working an extra day or two days is just not worth it, financially. Under our legislation, families will have the option to go back to work, knowing they can afford quality child care, earn more and save more. According to the Bureau of Statistics over the last year 73,000 people who wanted to work didn't look for work, because they couldn't make childcare costs work for them. What a lost opportunity for these parents and for their children, because research shows that these early preschool years are significant formative years. Children learn to play through interaction with others. They learn more and develop their skills. It prepares them for school and it prepares them for life. We know that when we invest in these early years we get better outcomes for them later on. Under our reforms a family on the median combined income of $120,000 with one child in early childhood education will save $1,780 in the first year. That is significant, and it is good news. The Albanese government is also introducing reforms to help more Indigenous children into early education as part of the government's cheaper child care, all Indigenous children will be able to access 36 hours of subsidised child care a fortnight from July. These simple changes will benefit around 6,600 First Nations families. The government knows that things are tough for many families in our community, and that's why the Albanese government is taking a number of practical steps. Cutting the cost of child care through legislation is a significant cost saver that will help to ease the squeeze on many families. It will help women to return to work, it will improve the wages of families, it will improve the future for children and, importantly, it will make it easier for families across our nation. This is a reform. It is only one element of the Albanese government's package to foster a better and more caring and inclusive Australia. Indi Electorate: Mansfield RESPOND 551 16:45 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi Obesity rates in Australia are among the highest in the world. One in four of our children are overweight or obese. Last year the ABC ran a series called Magda's Big National Health Check, and it highlighted this issue. It featured Mansfield, a marvellous little town in my community of Indi, as a town that was doing something about this issue. Mansfield is part of the NHMRC funded RESPOND project, a project that's being conducted by Deakin University in conjunction with local communities across north-east Victoria. Put simply, RESPOND is a shared community led approach to support children to be healthy by upskilling community members to come up with local solutions to having a healthy diet. As a baseline, a range of health related data was collected by Deakin University in 2019 from 190 local students across years 2, 4 and 6, giving specific insight into the health and wellbeing of our Mansfield children. Two key findings from that baseline data were that 21 per cent of boys and 24 per cent of girls lived with overweight or obesity, and only 11 per cent of the boys and 12 per cent of the girls met daily vegetable intake requirements. Deakin University then worked with Mansfield District Hospital's health promotion team and the Mansfield community to answer the question: what helps and what discourages our children to eat healthily and be physically active? The community came together and brainstormed action ideas that would see Mansfield become a healthier place to live. Mansfield District Hospital put their money where their mouth was, and they funded a project coordinator from their very cash-strapped health promotion budget. I want to underscore that, because, for any local health service, to find money for health promotion, unfortunately, is extremely difficult. They saw this as a way that ultimately they could do something for their community. Here's a taste of what the Mansfield community are doing. Firstly, there's the Mansfield Fresh Food Drive. Volunteers collect excess locally grown produce, and then local families come and access it for free, eliminating a major barrier to vegetable consumption for families: cost. Secondly, they designed a program called Active Footpaths, a series of stickers installed on residential footpaths across the township that encourage passers-by to stop and complete a range of different exercises. You can imagine how much fun the kids are having doing this and encouraging adults to do it at the same time. They set up a Soup for Schools program. The food technology class at the local secondary college got involved, and they prepare soup each week during term 3 and deliver it to one of the local primary schools to serve to the students for lunch. The children not only eat the soup but receive recipe cards and are encouraged to recreate the meal at home with their families, thus pursuing lifelong learning not only for them but for their mothers and fathers and sometimes their grandparents who may be at home. The list goes on. In fact, Mansfield has delivered a total of 21 initiatives—this is all coming from a small town—specific to the needs of its own community since this program began. Mansfield District Hospital has learnt that, when a local health service works hand-in-hand with the community in the design and implementation of change, their health promotion efforts are vastly more successful. It's classic bottom-up. I'm so proud of Mansfield, and I want to congratulate some key people who've made this happen and are continuing to make it happen: Lucy Marks, integrated health promotion coordinator; Melanie Green, director of operations; Mansfield RESPOND volunteers; the CEO of Mansfield District Hospital and leader of Mansfield health, Cameron Butler; and the board of Mansfield health. We can't forget these people, because they're volunteers, pushing forward for this as well. I want to acknowledge the work of Professor Steven Allender and his team from Deakin University. Thank you for partnering with the community of Mansfield in my electorate. You're really making a difference. You're translating evidence into practice. This is what we've got to do in rural and regional Australia. It's no good to continue to think that we have worse health outcomes than anyone else. We need to focus on what we're doing really well, and Mansfield is an exemplar of that. Harding, Professor Margaret Ann, AO 552 16:50 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra It is with immense sadness that I rise to speak following the death of Professor Ann Harding AO, a groundbreaking economist and the founder and director for 16 years of the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling, NATSEM, at the University of Canberra. She was a woman of incredible intellect, drive and vision who had a deep commitment to quality research and putting evidence at the centre of public policy decision-making. She was committed to decision-makers putting the needs of and impacts on Australians at the centre of their thinking as they made policies that affect us all. She was a strong female leader who was a mentor too many and gave great opportunities to women around her. She was a person who cared deeply about other people, and I had the great privilege to see all of this firsthand, as I worked with her at NATSEM for many years. She pioneered microsimulation in Australia. This is the modelling of the impacts of policies, particularly tax and transfer policies, on households and individuals. She also put the analysis of poverty and inequality at the centre of the public policy discussion. Through NATSEM, she built the capability for this type of modelling in Australia and built a community of people that continue this work today. Through that tight knit community of microsimulators across academia and the Public Service, particularly Treasury and the Department of Social Services, most of them would have NATSEM and Ann to thank for building that capability. And we all have her to thank for enabling this kind of analysis to inform policy. She fostered an environment in which wonderful work was done but also from which many relationships, professional and personal, have continued to this day. So many people were part of that really positive culture—there are too many to name, but some of my amazing former colleagues are here in the chamber today—and that was no accident, because that was what Ann built in establishing NATSEM. After graduating from Sydney university with honours in economics, Ann worked as a journalist and then at the Parliamentary Library and in the Public Service. She then went to the London School of Economics, where she completed her PhD, 'Lifetime income distribution and redistribution in Australia: Applications of a dynamic cohort micro simulation model', winning a British Council scholarship. It was after that that she established NATSEM at the University of Canberra in 1993. She was just 34 and one of the youngest women ever appointed as a professor. At the time she said, as quoted in the Canberra Times: The reason for making the centre an independent institution is that it will be available as a national resource to anyone who wants to use it for strategic planning and to help improve the level of social and economic policy-making. It's going to help construct a much more informed debate about social policy. And it did. At the time, the then Minister for Health, Housing and Community Services, Brian Howe, stated: There is currently a critical lack of information about the actual impact of government policy and programs on the people we are seeking to help … The models being developed by NATSEM will substantially fill that void and will help governments to target health and welfare services so they better meet the needs of all Australians. The impact of NATSEM was seen in some of the biggest policy debates of the last few decades, including the GST and the impact of moving sole parents onto the unemployment benefit. NATSEM's work really highlighted the terrible impacts of the coalition's 2014 budget. They also provided incredible information on health, regional modelling, effective marginal tax rates, child care and education and contributed to wage cases. In 2016, Ann was awarded the Order of Australia. According to her appointment she co-authored or authored over 300 books. Her ResearchGate profile lists 138 publications and 2,207 citations. On a personal note, without the opportunities Ann gave me in her encouragement and mentoring, this shy person who started at NATSEM would never have dreamed of doing public speaking or, least of all, to be in this place. Thank you, Ann; rest in peace. Petrie Electorate 552 16:55 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I had great feedback from my online post asking members from the Petrie electorate to tag an issue that they'd like me to speak about today. As your federal MP, I'll always raise issues in this place for you. Let me discuss a few of them. Jill from Bracken Ridge wanted me to speak about the Voice. She says she does not support the Voice and that there are more important issues that affect all Australians around cost of living, schools, housing, roads and health care. Robert from Redcliffe also thought that everyone who had been elected as a representative in the House of Representatives represented those people and were their voices. The good news is that it isn't up to the Prime Minister or the Leader of the Opposition or members of this House. When the government puts a referendum in place later this year, it's the Australian people who decide on the Voice. As I understand it, there will be no yes and no pamphlets provided to voters. I think there should be, and in past referendums there have been. But, ultimately, Jill and Robert, you will have your say at that referendum. In relation to youth crime, Paul from Bald Hills wrote to me about that. Paul mentioned that he's very concerned about it. Susan Boyd from Griffin wrote about youth crime as well. It is a big issue. In North Lakes in my electorate a young mum was murdered around Christmas by young people under the age of 18 in a home invasion. The reality is the Palaszczuk government in Queensland, Susan and Paul, are responsible for youth crime. In their three terms, in the 10 years that Annastacia Palaszczuk has been Premier, we've seen the youth laws watered down. They want to raise the age of criminal responsibility. The reality is we need a state government that will deliver laws for justice, not just about rehabilitation. I would encourage you to write to your state MPs. I have written to them about this as well. Karen from Bald Hills wrote to me about family and domestic violence, saying there needs to be more housing readily available for women escaping DV and family violence. That's absolutely true. It is a big issue. I think all governments, state or federal, regardless of political persuasion, have been good at raising awareness around domestic violence. I think more people are coming forward now as more MPs speak about it. When I was the Assistant Minister for Community Housing, Homelessness and Community Services in the coalition government, we rolled out $60 million in funding for safe places to help 600 women and children escaping DV. Those places are built now—I'm sure most of them are built—and that's a good thing. There's always more work to be done. We need to make sure we have housing ministers who invest in public housing. We need to make sure the funding that we provide through the national housing funding—some $320 million goes to the Palaszczuk government each year—is invested in new housing and that stock is recycled. In relation to mental health, Amaya from North Lakes said that wait times are too long in the public system. We know there are a lot of issues in the public hospital system in Queensland at the moment. Costs are too high, Amaya was saying, and the sector requires a massive overhaul. Now, Amaya, you mentioned you have some ideas. Please email me. I'd be happy to put them forward to ministers at the federal or state level. We know that the Albanese government have reduced the Medicare rebates from 20 sessions down to 10. They had the opportunity to extend that. I think that was the wrong call from this current federal government. We also need to change the government in Queensland. You need to vote LNP in October next year, because the reality is that in the one term in the past three decades that the LNP has been in government, when Lawrence Springborg was the health minister, the public health system was running a lot more efficiently than what it is at the moment. If you're waiting too long to see a psychologist in public hospitals, change the government next year. The other thing is that we do need to train more psychologists and provide recognition of prior learning for international arrivals. I have spoken to the current minister in the federal government about that. But industry bodies are often responsible there, and they're reluctant to change that, Amaya. Lachlan in Griffin spoke about the cost of living. Obviously that is the No. 1 issue. There are some big issues there. That's all I have time to talk about today, but thank you to everyone who responded to my post. As your federal MP I'll keep raising your issues in this place. House adjourned at 17:00 The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Payne ) took the chair at 09:30.

Thursday, 9 February 2023

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Payne ) took the chair at 09:30.

 

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 554 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Immigration Detention 554 09:30 Mr CHANDLER-MATHER 300121 Griffith This week in parliament, the Labor government, with the support of the Liberals and Nationals, voted together to redesignate Nauru as an offshore processing country, a move which will see hundreds of millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars spent on contracts to continue the cruel exile of refugees seeking asylum in Australia. When moving the Nauru motion this week, the Minister for Home Affairs said that Labor's immigration policy was 'strong on borders without being weak on humanity'. There is absolutely no evidence of that when Labor continues to support a detention regime that doesn't contain a scrap of humanity. Conditions in offshore detention facilities are appalling. Both parties are responsible for knowingly inflicting untold mental and physical harm on refugees held indefinitely in these deeply cruel conditions. Australia's regime has been repeatedly found in violation of international law. Our mandatory detention regime within the country is also a disgrace. At the end of last year, there were 1,315 people in detention, many having been detained for more than five years with no end in sight. From 2000 to 2018 there were dozens of deaths in Australia's immigration detention facilities, including as many as 20 suicides. Just last week we saw another tragedy: an Iraqi refugee who had been detained for five years died in a suspected suicide in Villawood Immigration Detention Centre. He had requested to be moved multiple times due to tensions with detainees, including a fight the night before his death, but his requests were ignored. It absolutely does not have to be like this. This week, by the way, the Greens introduced the Migration Amendment (Evacuation to Safety) Bill 2023 to compel the government to immediately transfer to Australia all those still in offshore detention in PNG and Nauru. It will be up to the Labor government whether or not they can at least allow those people to leave those hellish conditions. It's time to end decades of cruelty and suffering caused by Australia's immigration regime both onshore and offshore. The mandatory detention must end. But let's be clear about the politics of this. Time and again, politicians from both sides use refugees as a scapegoat. They decide to be cruel and impose cruelty and misery on desperate people, often fleeing conditions which our foreign policy has contributed to—not to mention the invasion of Iraq and the massive foreign policy and international implications that had on refugees moving around the world. And instead of welcoming these people with open arms, this country is deliberately cruel to the point of pushing people to suicide, which is devastating. Rather than saying that in a country like this, regardless of the colour of your skin or the country you come from, we have enough wealth to ensure that you live a good life, they say, 'No: we have to torture these people to the point of death.' Why does this happen? If we were to tax those big corporations, if we were to take the enormous wealth in this country and use it to give everyone a good life, then we could afford that. But, rather than taking on the rich and powerful, this Labor government continues to go after the weak. (Time expired) Greenway Electorate: Telecommunications 554 09:33 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway Access to reliable mobile services is not a nice-to-have; it is a necessity. Residents expect that when they move into a suburb they're going to have electricity, roads and schools, and they also expect they'll have access to communications services, including mobile phone coverage. This time last year, some households and businesses in the Ponds, a suburb in my electorate of Greenway, struggled to access even a single bar of mobile reception. The mobile carriers confirmed that this suburb had some of the worst quality metropolitan mobile coverage in Greater Sydney. Small businesses in the area and residents who work from home were suffering. A local from the Ponds, David, who runs a management consultancy, said he struggled to make a successful work call from inside his own house. David told the Daily Telegraph: I get one bar of 3G in one corner of my office upstairs in the southern side of my house and I can't move the phone … And IT consultant Abhinav said: … there's so many people and the towers have limited capacity. And yet the New South Wales Liberal government refused to act, so Greenway did. I made representations to the New South Wales government and initiated a petition that gathered over 1,000 signatures from the Greenway community in support of a new mobile tower in the Ponds. After months and months of tireless community campaigning, our pressure achieved an important victory in March last year. The New South Wales Liberals finally backtracked and approved a new mobile tower for the good people of the Ponds. And that's why, just a couple of weeks ago, it was especially pleasing to visit a local park in the Ponds, Jonas Bradley reserve, where contractors were commencing works to finally build this much needed tower. This outcome is the culmination of advocacy from our community and shows what we can achieve when we work together. I thank the residents of the Ponds for their patience and their ongoing involvement to get this crucial piece of infrastructure built. I won stop fighting for this tower until it's up and running in the Ponds and our residents and small businesses have the mobile coverage they need and deserve. COVID-19: Vaccination 555 09:36 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash Voices, voices crying in the wilderness. Who are these voices crying in the wilderness? Who are these voices that are not being heard, and who put them in the wilderness? Who placed them there? They are those that are vaccine injured or unvaccinated and unable to work. Tens of thousands of Australians across Australia have been damaged. Even members in this house have quietly said to me on the side how they've been damaged. I pray that they speak out. It didn't escape me yesterday that it was the United Nations International Women's Day, which was celebrated by this parliament with a breakfast and an address by the Prime Minister. This unfolding health and social disaster is disproportionately affecting women, many of whom are not believed. They are told they're anxious and they're told that they are just being hysterical. Such a massive untruth for so many people I've spoken to. Why so many women? Because they're the ones who worked in the mandated workforce. Why so many young men? Young, fit, men, like Jacob, who I spoke to yesterday—disabled for the rest of his days is how it feels for him at the moment. Many of the women are self-employed, so no income means no compensation and no justice. Then, at the other end of the spectrum, there are people like Ben and Hayden in Perth. They're both tradies and semiprofessional sportsmen whose lives have been utterly ruined. Ben is about to lose his house because he can no longer afford to pay the mortgage. People are losing their jobs and homes; they're unemployed. That's now also including the carers of the injured. Jackie Stricker is reporting Lifeline calls are increasing through the roof, with people with no money and feeling sick. My office have talked to unemployed firefighters who haven't worked for 17 months. Why? Because they are not vaccinated. They are stood down, but without pay. Our people have lost hope. They've lost control of their lives, and we put them out there. The National Cabinet made these decisions and we are responsible because we are their elected members. The buck stops with us. We put these voices into the wilderness and it's up to us to call them back. Pearce Electorate: Riding for Disabled Capricorn 555 09:39 Ms ROBERTS 157125 Pearce I rise to speak about a fantastic community organisation in my electorate of Pearce in Western Australia that has been doing excellent work for the past half a century. I have been the patron of Riding for Disabled Capricorn for many years, and I'm so proud and passionate about what they do. RDA Capricorn is one of eight centres in WA affiliated with the internationally recognised Riding for the Disabled Association Australia. RDA Capricorn was the first such centre to be established in WA. It was founded in 1972 and is celebrating its 50th anniversary of remarkable work to improve people's physical and emotional health and wellbeing. RDA has a long and proud history of promoting and supporting horseriding for those living with disabilities of any form. The team is led by the amazing Julie Osborne and includes many people who willingly volunteer their time to bring out the best in the participants. The volunteers also tell me about the wonderful benefits that they gain from supporting people with disabilities. The friendships formed are strong and long-lasting, and the environment is like one big family who care about one another and who want to ensure everybody has opportunity and equality. Above all else, they provide an environment where fun is foremost. Riding horses is beneficial in many ways, as it is a natural reflex-inhibiting position which improves posture and balance and provides a unique form of rehabilitation and exercise. I have been overjoyed to previously sponsor a horse ironically named Mouse, who is a Clydesdale. She has now been adopted by the WA police and is now known as Officer Mouse. I have also sponsored a horse called Poppy, who is an absolute delight and who recently gave birth to a foal who we have named Ranger. This was a wonderful moment—meeting Ranger for the very first time and seeing the bond and care of his mum, Poppy. Animals bring so much joy in many ways, and at RDA Capricorn that level of joy is clear in participants' faces and words. RDA Capricorn is an incredibly worthwhile and important organisation that I am honoured to support and champion. Riding offers people living with disabilities an element of challenge which is often denied to them. It offers them the chance to gain mobility and a sense of achievement. The benefits are many, including improved balance and coordination, strengthened muscles, faster reflexes and improved respiration and circulation. I commend and congratulate the RDA Capricorn team for its continuing community spirit and for what they do. Thank you. Mini Farm Project 556 09:42 Mr YOUNG 201906 Longman Last year, 1.2 million children and one in six adults went hungry. In the past 12 months, two million households experienced severe food insecurity. Severe food insecurity is where people skip meals or don't eat for a whole day. These figures are not from a Third World country. They are Australian figures, which I found hard to believe. But today I want to highlight the work of a young man from my electorate of Longman who has decided to be part of the solution in a unique way. Nick Steiner's initiative, the Mini Farm Project, was born out of a vision Nick has to involve local residents in growing fresh produce that is in turn sold at affordable prices to members of the public, as well as a component of the produce grown being given away to charitable organisations who supply groceries to those most in need in our community. With this produce being supplied at no charge, this means that the organisations have funds that would normally be spent on buying produce freed up to purchase more grocery items, and therefore they can reach a greater number of people in our community. The way Nick is able to achieve this is a multipronged approach. First, he will work with generous, community minded farmers who donate a part of their land exclusively for Nick to use. One such farm is Luvaberry, owned by Mandy and Adrian Schultz, who have donated two acres of their farm, located in Wamuran in my electorate of Longman, for Nick to use. They are the latest farm to join the Mini Farm Project family, along with farmers at Samford, Loganlea and Coolum. Nick has one paid employee, the farm manager. This farm manager is supported by volunteers from the local community who work under the instruction of the farm manager. Nick then also involves local businesses by appealing to their sense of community and asking them to sponsor a bed on the farm. In return, the business will receive acknowledgement with a plaque on the farm and media exposure for the business. This, along with the public purchasing produce and making donations, helps cover the organisation's costs. Nick relies on no government funding, and part of his vision is to keep governments out of this and inspire community generosity to fund this wonderful initiative, and for this I congratulate him. So how can you help? I'm glad you asked, Deputy Speaker. By donating $20, you will buy a box of fresh produce that will go to a household in need. For just $3.70 a month, you can join the Mini Farm community. Nick's dream is to have 100,000 people as part of the community. When we all do a bit, we accomplish great things. Buy the Mini Farm's own blend of coffee or buy produce for your own consumption. For more details, go to their website at mfp.org.au. Nick was recently recognised for his efforts by the Moreton Bay Regional Council and was awarded their prestigious Citizen of the Year Award. Congratulations, Nick. Nick has a vision to expand over the entire country, and with his determination and entrepreneurial gift I'm sure he will succeed. I wish him well in his endeavours. Health Care 556 09:45 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston The Albanese government's key priority is strengthening our healthcare system. We know that under the previous government our healthcare system was not delivering, and of course, residents in my electorate of Kingston, the southern suburbs of Adelaide, have raised concerns with me time and time again. That's why I'm so pleased that we continue to focus on rebuilding our primary healthcare system so that Australians can get care when they need it. Of course, we have kept our election promise to deliver cheaper medicines. From 1 January, the maximum cost of medicines under the PBS will reduce. We're also strengthening Medicare with our reforms through the Strengthening Medicare Taskforce, establishing 50 Medicare urgent care clinics and, of course, the GP grants program. In my local electorate, the Commonwealth government has partnered with the Labor state government to invest $400 million in the expansion of Flinders Medical Centre, adding 136 extra beds, and, of course, 24 new beds at the repat. I'm particularly thrilled to hear about the South Australian government's complementary commitment to the upgrade of the Noarlunga Hospital. This upgrade is critically needed and will complement the Commonwealth's commitment to an urgent care clinic in Adelaide's south. Recently, I spoke with my community about the plans for an urgent care clinic in the southern suburbs of Adelaide to provide care for urgent but not life-threatening situations, and the news was strongly welcomed by residents. I've had a flood of positive responses into my office highlighting the need. I will just mention a few. Rebecca from Hackham said: Our baby daughter has had to present to ED because we couldn't get into a GP or a locum. Similarly, Ben from Huntfield Heights said: I have three children aged 2-12, an urgent care clinic would give us an alternative to hospital … This would mean peace of mind, and money well spent. Of course, it's not just families that need urgent care. A number of residents have let me know that they have chronic health conditions, but they feel guilty about attending emergency departments. Mark from Christies Beach said: My wife has a serious illness and at times requires urgent assistance … we are reluctant to go to the ED because we know they're very busy. Wendy, also from Christies Beach, said: Hopefully I won't have to feel guilty any more crying in emergency when I can't breathe. Clearly, there is a compelling need for more options in accessing care and strong support for a new urgent care clinic in Adelaide's south. It is the Albanese Labor government that has made primary care a priority. It's the Albanese Labor government that is committed to tackling solutions to ensure our healthcare system is fit for purpose for the next decade. Rural and Regional Banking and Financial Services 557 09:48 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland I rise to again raise my concerns about the arrogant contempt the big four banks are displaying towards their customers, particularly in remote, rural and regional Australia. In September last year, the Regional Banking Taskforce released its final report, and that task force analysed the trends in bank branch closures in regional and remote Australia. The report identified the obvious and disproportionate impact that branch closures have already had on vulnerable Australians. We're talking about the elderly, low-income earners, people from Indigenous backgrounds and people with poor digital literacy. They all strongly prefer face-to-face transactions and bank services. The banks know all this; they just don't care. Among the task force's key recommendations was for the banks to establish a process for conducting and publishing regional branch closure impact assessments by the middle of 2023. It seems like a pretty simple and practical idea, which would encourage some level of transparency between the banks and their customers. The Australian Banking Association even had the audacity to agree, and I quote from a media release from the association dated 30 September 2022: The Australian Banking Association today welcomed the release of the Regional Banking Taskforce Final Report and will work constructively to implement its recommendations. ABA member banks appreciate the government's considered work to help ensure the ongoing accessibility of banking services across Australia and are committed to continuing to serve their customers that live in regional areas. Well, that's complete bulldust. I'm advised that, since that media release was issued, there have been 86 announced bank branch closures across the country. The banks appear to have used this report and this particular recommendation as a signal to fast-track closures before any further transparency or impact assessments are required. When a bank branch closes, particularly in a regional location, the impacts will spread throughout the community. The customers who are required to travel distances to access their bank will incur additional cost-of-living increases with petrol and that sort of thing. But they will also, when they are in those other towns, spend money on other services, which diminishes the smaller towns in the first place. Finally, I refer to Westpac's values statement on its own website. This is Westpac's own values. It says Westpac is: Helpful—Passionate about providing a great customer experience Well, I say to Westpac: shutting down branches in towns like Sale, in my electorate, with 14,000 residents, is not a great customer experience, and it's not helpful. I call on all the banks to impose a moratorium on further branch closures until the task force recommendations are actually in place. Work with us in regional communities. Stop taking the lazy option of shutting down branches. It's time for all the banks to respect their customers and to focus on people, not on their own profits and their own fat bonuses. Lilley Electorate: Floods 557 09:51 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley 28 February marks 12 months since devastating floods wreaked havoc on homes, businesses, schools and sporting clubs in my electorate of Lilley on the Northside of Brisbane. Over three days, our community was smashed by torrential rain, the likes of which the Northsiders I spoke to had never seen before. Thousands of people lined up in cars, waiting hours for sandbags at the Zillmere depot, as Daniel and his team of council workers worked above and beyond to try to keep up with the demand. Tim, the tinnie man of Finnie Road, and numerous other Deagon tinnie owners like him ferried people up and down the streets of Deagon to help them evacuate. Kedron-Wavell became a temporary emergency shelter for stranded residents who could not return to their homes. Our community came together. St Pat's and Nudgee volunteered on a Saturday to clean up people's homes, and Domino's donated the pizza to feed them. Good Samaritans from Banyo and beyond dropped off hot meals to my office that we delivered to Northside Connect in Nundah and to SANDBAG in Sandgate. The now Prime Minister came to a barbecue in Deagon to listen to residents' experiences. In the aftermath of the floods, as we took stock of the damage and looked to rebuild, two things have really become clear. Firstly, natural disaster mitigation should be treated as essential nation-building infrastructure. It protects communities; it keeps our economy and productivity moving during natural disasters; and, most importantly, it saves lives. Secondly, we need government action to keep insurance prices from skyrocketing. The Albanese government is committed to helping communities to prepare better and recover more quickly from natural disasters. Our flagship Disaster Ready Fund, supported by the Insurance Council of Australia, the Red Cross and the Australian Local Government Association, will invest up to $200 million per year to help homes, businesses and communities resist floods, cyclones and bushfires. We have established the National Emergency Management Agency and announced an independent review into Australia's disaster funding system. The Albanese government is also working in partnership with the insurance sector, and we are delivering $22.6 million to work with the insurance sector to find ways to help Australians with rising insurance premiums. This funding will also help to find ways to investigate initiatives to reduce hazard risk, which will put downward pressure on insurance premiums, a vital measure for residents in suburbs like Deagon, Boondall and Brighton that are facing increased premiums. On the ground in Lilley, the Albanese government has co-invested almost $10 million to help local sporting clubs in their flood recovery and to better cope with the severe weather events that lie ahead. That includes $2.9 million for the Mitchelton Football Club, $1.8 million for the Valley Hockey Club and $1.6 million for the Brisbane Netball Association, and there's more. We will be flooded again. I think we all accept that that is inevitable where we live. So we must be better prepared to help people protect their homes and their clubs and to recover faster. I thank the House. Schneider, Mr Matthew 558 09:54 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Last week, I attended the funeral of much-loved Gold Coast son Matthew Schneider, where over 2,000 people from his family, his church community and the Gold Coast community gathered at the Apostolic Church of Queensland in Hatton Vale to mourn his passing and celebrate his life achievements. On behalf of my community, I send deepest condolences to his family—his wife, Samantha, and his three children, Maggie and twins Oliver and Louie—and to so many who loved him so very much. I'd like to honour his life by outlining his legacy. Matthew was a lion of a man with a big heart, and he lived by the words, 'Be kind but be fierce,' until the very end. Matthew was a passionate town planner. He joined Urbis in 2016 and led the Urbis Gold Coast office, highly respected in his field as a visionary. As well as his role at Urbis, he was a director at Placemakers Gold Coast and held board positions at Griffith University, the Property Council of Australia, Study Gold Coast, Bond University and Top 100 Women in Construction. Most recently, he was the president at his beloved Southport Sharks footy club. His contribution across the Gold Coast is what earned him the nickname 'Mr Everywhere'. He was also an integral part of the City Heart Taskforce, of which I'm chair and convener. He represented the Property Council and offered insight into many areas of our economy. His company was a key partner in the Reimagine forums that we held on the Gold Coast in 2020 and 2021, which set the tone for the future of jobs, skills and industry for our region. Matthew contributed greatly to the City Heart Taskforce meetings, always with an eye to the future and with vision, passion and dedication to our city that the members collectively loved so much. Matt said: The Gold Coast motivates me. I never expected to get passionate about the city but I accidentally fell in love with it when I moved here. Tragically, he was diagnosed in June 2022 with stage 4 cancer that spread throughout his body. Yet, in the face of adversity, his positivity shone through, and I've never before witnessed such fierce bravery, grace and dignity from one so young up against such adversity, in the months leading to his passing. From the community in Moncrieff and on behalf of the City Heart Taskforce—and if I can speak from the heart of the Gold Coast—we say: Matt, you will forever be in our hearts and minds. You were taken too soon at just 39. We honour your journey and your family. Your legacy will live on across our city for generations to come. Rest in peace, our very special friend, Matty Schneider—10 October 1983 to 27 January 2023. Kesby, Mr Ryan 558 09:57 Dr REID 300126 Robertson Recently I became aware of a rising sporting star from the Central Coast named Ryan Kesby. Ryan has been dealt a few challenges in his early life. However, he has not allowed this to alter his trajectory. When Ryan was a child, he exhibited signs of strong athletic capabilities, and pretty soon it became evident that he was developing sporting skills beyond his age. In primary school, Ryan struggled academically and was challenged with his learning. He experienced difficulties with friendship groups and, unfortunately, was subjected to bullying. Ryan didn't let this get to him, and he decided to throw himself into sport. He took a liking to trampolining and was very soon identified as talented and was asked to compete in the New South Wales team. However, luck was not on his side: he broke an arm a few weeks before, and the opportunity was missed. This did not deter Ryan, though. In 2015, Ryan's world was changed when he first ran onto the field to play AFL. Soon he was selected to represent the Central Coast. He did this from 2015 to 2021—six years. That's quite an impressive span of representative sporting achievements. In 2017 Ryan was named Best and Fairest for Hunter Central Coast AFL. He represented Narara Valley High School in Sydney North for AFL in 2019 and he was named the athletics champion of the school for 2017, 2018, 2019 and 2021. Further to this, Ryan was acknowledged as the junior male sportsperson in 2019 and senior sportsperson at Narara Valley High School in 2019 and 2022. Ryan decided to try touch football now and was selected to play in the Central Coast Dolphins representative touch football team. He did so across several years from 2019 to 2022, receiving the coach's award in 2020 and 2021. Ryan has just returned from playing in the New South Wales Combined High School Open Boys Touch Football team at the National Youth Championships on the Sunshine Coast. Ryan has completed a Certificate II in Hospitality (Kitchen Operations) and is finalising his practical experience in a Certificate II in Construction Pathways. Currently he's holding down two part-time jobs and he's saving for a car. As you can imagine, Ryan's mother is beyond proud of him, as are we, the people of the Central Coast. I think it's fair to say: 'Ryan, you're doing an amazing job, mate. Keep up the good work.' The DEPUTY SPEAKER 144732 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. MOTIONS 559 MOTIONS National Apology to Victims and Survivors of Institutional Child Sexual Abuse 559 10:00 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie by leave—I move: That further proceedings be conducted in the House. Question agreed to. CONDOLENCES 559 CONDOLENCES Arnold, Constable Matthew, Dare, Mr Alan, McCrow, Constable Rachel 559 10:01 The DEPUTY SPEAKER 144732 I understand it is the wish of honourable members to signify at this stage their respect and sympathy by rising in their places, and I ask all present to do so. Honourable members having stood in their places— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 144732 I thank the Federation Chamber. 10:01 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie by leave—I move: That further proceedings be conducted in the House. Question agreed to. MOTIONS 559 MOTIONS Parliamentary Standards 559 10:02 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle As the chair of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards, I am beyond delighted to speak to the Prime Minister's motion that this House endorse the committee's draft behaviour standards and codes for parliamentarians, for parliamentarian staff and for Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. Yesterday marked one year since the parliament acknowledged the Set the standard report by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins. The revelations of sexual harassment, bullying and sexual assault that have been made clear through almost 1,800 submissions to the report were shocking. The Australian people rightly called for change, and the government has been working across the parliament to implement the Commissioner's 28 recommendations and to deliver a safer and more respectful parliamentary workplace. The parliament has already established the Parliamentary Workplace Support Service to provide trauma informed and confidential support across the parliament. We've changed the standing orders to make sitting days more family friendly and provided new training programs for parliamentarians and staff to build greater awareness and understanding of inclusion, diversity and respect. And we've released the MOP(S) Act review and agreed in principle to all 15 of its recommendations. One of Jenkins's central recommendations was to introduce codes of conduct for parliamentarians, for parliamentarian staff and for all Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. These codes were developed by the multiparty Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards which I chaired. I want to take a moment to thank all of the members of that committee for their diligence, for their consultation, for their hard work and, it must be said, at the end their determination to get this done. I'm honoured to be joined in the chamber by one of those committee members, the member for Lalor. I also want to acknowledge the member for Bean and the member for Calwell who helped enormously in the committee process. The member for North Sydney and the member for Forrest were our House members on the select committee, and I was joined by the very able deputy chair, Senator the Hon. Marise Payne in the other place, along with Senator Claire Chandler, Senator Mehreen Faruqi and Senator Deb O'Neill. There was a big body of work for the committee to do, and it was unusual for a parliamentary committee to be asked to draft and develop some codes of conduct. I pay tribute, as I said, to all those committee members. I'm proud that the committee was able to deliver a report to the House and the other place that was unanimous in our resolve. There was no dissenting report; there were no additional comments. It was a tough process reaching consensus, but that is what is required, and, indeed, I would argue it's what is expected of us by the majority of Australian citizens. This is testament to the collaborative work of the committee members. I also want to take a moment to thank everybody who made submissions, who spoke at the hearings, who undertook the survey and who participated in confidential roundtable discussions. The committee was determined to ensure that we had multiple ways in which we would be able to engage with staff, with public servants, with politicians, with members of the press gallery—there are so many different people who work and engage in Commonwealth workplaces across the country. The codes of conduct that we've landed on and recommended to the House and the Senate really set out some very clear guidelines as to how we must behave towards each other, with a focus on respectful behaviour, encouraging diverse perspectives and recognising the power and influence that we all have and ensuring that that is not abused. They also set out some clear expectations of upholding laws that support safe and respectful workplaces. We have a body of laws in Australia, including on matters regarding bullying, harassment and sexual harassment or assault and discrimination in any form. We have existing laws, and these behaviour standards remind us that this behaviour will not be tolerated, condoned or ignored. The committee also put forward recommendations that guidance material and training accompany these new codes. We know how important that is because the parliament is seeking not just to set guidelines about how we should behave respectfully towards each other but also to drive a much longer-term project around cultural change. That is the hardest work of all. Honestly, as challenging as it was to draft codes of conduct, that is the easy part. We've got a big job to do on education and the guidance materials that need to follow so that people understand very clearly what is being asked of us. But the really big change is cultural change, and that's where we'll deliver really long-term and meaningful change in not just this place but all of our workplaces that are recognised as Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces across Australia. I can't tell you how many times witnesses said these codes of conduct would not be worth the paper they were written on if there weren't also a strong enforcement regime to accompany them. The motion before the House flags the need for that. We are being asked to endorse a set of codes now, pending the formation of what will be an independent body. The Sex Discrimination Commissioner called it an Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission and our committee is very happy with that title, but that will be a matter for the parliament. It will be that commission that will need to determine how guidance is given on the codes, what the compliance mechanisms will look like and how breaches will be dealt with. For those people who are interested and are wondering what that might look like, some very clear guidance was provided by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner in her report. Our committee was satisfied that there should be a suite of options available and that they should be far-ranging and commensurate with the level of seriousness of a breach. There might be an element of nervousness about this because the Australian parliament has, to date, failed on each and every occasion it has attempted to introduce codes of conduct. My plea to this parliament is to look at the international experience. Please read the report. Look at those draft codes of conduct. In our report we have also recommended a review, which is right and proper. This is a new process for the Australian parliament and we want to make sure we are setting best practice. The one good thing about being one of the last countries in the Commonwealth to achieve this is that we get to learn some lessons, so I would recommend people take the time to look carefully at these codes. As I said, for too long this parliament has sought to address this issue. It is almost a half-century since we first debated the need for codes of conduct in this parliament. We squibbed on it in 1975 and again in 1993, 2008, 2011 and 2012. Let's not allow the 47th parliament to join that list of failures. Let's not allow it. We owe it to the Australian people. We owe it to everyone who shared their stories of pain and trauma. And we owe it to ourselves and the future generations of people that will serve and work in this place and in all the Commonwealth workplaces across the nation. I commend this motion to the House. 10:12 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I have given more than 1,000 speeches in this place, both in the House of Representatives and in the Federation Chamber, which was previously under a different title: the Main Committee. One of the most difficult speeches I've given in Parliament House was in March 2021 when, as Deputy Prime Minister, I addressed coalition staff with former prime minister Morrison—we did it in the Great Hall. We did it at a difficult time. To look out amongst the huge number of people there was difficult—there were so many staff members there. One of the most difficult words in the English language—it seems to be difficult to say in this place—is 'sorry'. I don't know why; it should be the easiest word. It shouldn't need to be said, certainly when it comes to addressing staff. In a five-minute address that day I said 'sorry' three times, not that I needed to say 'sorry' myself—I had done nothing wrong. I said 'sorry', on behalf of what I represented, to the staff who had felt, at that time, unsupported. I reiterate those remarks now, as I did then. If, in fact, the word 'sorry' needs to be said then I am sorry—deeply, sincerely, earnestly and honestly—if, at any time, I or the party that I represent have not lived up to expectations. Because it is simply not good enough that in 2023 we are talking to a motion which is called Set the Standard. The standard should have been back in 1901; we shouldn't be talking about it in the 21st century. We should all live up to that standard. It is a huge privilege and honour to be representative of a division and come to this place. People who send us here expect us to be our best selves. Even having to discuss this issue about not providing the right welfare to staff just doesn't equate; it doesn't seem right. But, indeed, we do and, indeed, we need to be better and, indeed, I hope and trust that we will be better, males particularly, males especially, because too many women have been let down. I know I've employed any number of females over the years. In this position, in this role, particularly for those younger females, I've made it my business to call their parents to say, 'I want you to know that I will treat your daughter as I treat my own daughter, Georgina. I want you to know that, when your daughter is in my employ, she will be looked after, she will be respected and she will have a great opportunity,' because I want young women who come to Parliament House to work for a member or senator to know that this is going to be the opportunity and experience of a lifetime for all the right reasons, for all good and right reasons, and it should be. This is a wonderful place in which to work whether you're an elected representative or whether you're a staff member of that person. We want more women to be elected representatives. I'm proud of what I was able to achieve in tripling the number of women in my Nationals party when I was the leader of the party, and some fine women too. I was doing the right and good thing by our party to bring about change, to help bring about a better culture in the National Party. I said when I was the leader of the party in March 2021, that same month I addressed the staff in the Great Hall, at our national conference: 'As with all workplaces in our nation, all homes, all places where people gather, we should be respectful. No female, no person, should ever feel unsafe in their workplace. No person should tolerate harassment of any kind or other inappropriate behaviour. We can all do better and we must do better.' It was right then, it's right now, it's now, it's imperative now but it should have been happening since 1901. We shouldn't be discussing this issue now because it just should come as second nature. It's respect. How hard is it to be respectful? How hard is it to keep your hands to yourself? How hard is it? You shouldn't have to think twice before saying something because it should be ingrained in your DNA to make sure that you don't say inappropriate things. I think we've taken great strides in recent years. The fact that we have more female representation across the parliament and more in decision-making cabinet roles, ministerial roles per se, does lead to more respect within this workplace. I was pleased that both the Prime Minister and opposition leader talked about this yesterday when this motion came before the House. But I do want to also talk about the Nationals because sometimes our party is wrongly accused of being behind the times on some things and we certainly are not in this regard. I know Julie Kirby from Western Australia is doing some wonderful things as part of our federal women's council. Our federal women's council has been in place since 1959, so we have some good history there. Can we do better as a party? Yes, of course we can. Kay Hull, my predecessor as the member of Riverina, is the federal president. Even in my own branch in Wagga Wagga, Mackenna Powell is doing a great job as the president of the branch, Anna O'Brien as the secretary, Julie Briggs as treasurer, and the current state candidate for Wagga Wagga in the state election is Andrianna Benjamin. They are all fine women, all doing their part so that women have more of a say in regional Australia. In the Nationals it was largely the initiative of John 'Black Jack' McEwen that a women's conference was formed within federal council. When Doug Anthony took over the federal leadership he decided to increase the direct flow of information between the federal women's council and his office. The late Doug Anthony and 'Black Jack' were fierce political warriors; they truly were. But they also had good intent and they knew the value of having women directly involved in making decisions, in creating a better culture, in making sure that the Nationals were at the forefront of better representing society in general and regional in Australia in particular. Certainly I know when issues such as domestic violence come up before our party at conference, or indeed in the party room, obviously we are all as one, but these issues are very much at the forefront and have been for decades, not just as a recent initiative but for decades. I look at the Senate leader at the moment, Senator Bridget McKenzie, and our deputy leader, Perin Davey, doing great things to ensure that female representation is a major issue in our party so we can set the standard, set a better standard, set the right standard, set the standard that we should have been doing, not just as Nationals, not just as Country Party people, but as representatives of society, of Australia, of the regions, since Federation. So I commend what has been done. I thank the Deputy Speaker, the member of Newcastle, a good friend of mine, for her involvement, and all who played a part in this process. I know for Nola Marino, the member for Forrest, this is especially close to her heart. I've been very close to Nola since I entered this place in 2010 and I know how concerned she has been that there have been accusations flying left, right and centre about the fact that we need to improve ourselves; indeed, we do. As men in this place, we can, we must, and we will do better. I will finish as I started. I say sorry if there have been things said and things done. If indeed I've been part of that process—not that I believe I have—I am sorry. We need to do better and we will do better. 10:22 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga Today is an important day and this is an important debate. As the member for Riverina just acknowledged, we make a lot of speeches in this place. I can't say I'm up to a thousand speeches yet. I don't think I'm quite there. But we do make a lot of speeches in this place and it feels like it is important that as many of us as possible make a speech on this particular issue and commit ourselves to setting the standard because that is actually what this is all about. It is about all of us in this place saying that enough is enough, recognising that the work has been done on how this can be a better workplace for us as members, for our staff and for all the people who come into contact with this parliament because, of course, we should be the ones who set the standard. It is unacceptable that we have been the workplace in Australia that has lagged behind, that somehow we have thought being a different workplace, which I absolutely acknowledge this place is, means we can be a workplace that has lower standards. That is absolutely not what being the parliament of Australia should be. We are the place that does set the standard for so many things across our country. We must also set the standard for ourselves. So today we are making it clear to everyone in this place and in our country that the behaviour that we have seen that has been tolerated here will not be tolerated in the future, that matters will not be swept under the carpet, that we will no longer say that that's a political thing, so we can't actually deal with it. It won't be ignored. It won't be 'managed', as some people have said they felt when bringing complaints forward in the past. These issues will be dealt with. It's a year now since the parliament acknowledged the Set the standard report by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, Kate Jenkins. I've thanked the commissioner for her work before, but, once again, I want to acknowledge what an important report that was. The report found that the experience of many staffers and others in this place was of a workplace that was often toxic and harmful. It found that there needed to be long-term cultural change in how our parliamentary workplace operates and that immediate reform was needed. The recommendations put forward in that report have helped to ensure that this workplace and all the workplaces we are connected with, like our electorate offices, are places that are safe and respectful and follow best practice in preventing and responding to bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault. I want to acknowledge all the people who came forward to tell their stories as part of the development of the Set the standard report. I know for many people that was not easy, and I want to thank them. Their bravery and courage in bringing forward their stories and being prepared to tell their stories—some publicly and some in private—have meant that we have a much stronger report to respond to as a parliament and that we are on track to being a better workplace. Thank you to all the people who did that for us. Over the past year, there has been a significant amount of work across the parliament to begin to implement the reforms recommended by Commissioner Jenkins to deliver a safer and more respectful parliamentary workplace for the thousands of people who work here. I acknowledge and thank my colleagues who have been part of the committee working to develop the standards for this place, the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards. I particularly acknowledge the work of the Deputy Speaker, my friend the member for Newcastle, who chaired the committee and did so much to bring together and shepherd that work, reminding us all that we are setting the standard and that this is an important part of it. The member for Lalor was also a member of the committee, and the member for North Sydney. I thank them, and others who aren't here at the moment, for all the work they have done. We now have before us a draft behaviour standards and codes, including specific codes for parliamentarians and for staff. Of course, the content of these codes is not actually groundbreaking; it is the sort of thing that is in codes of conduct across the country, but it is an important and overdue step forward for this place. We have lagged behind. We can now catch up and become a model workplace. In fact, we can work towards being an exemplar, a workplace that people look to for a standard. I've been a staffer in this place, and I am fortunate that my experience here was inspirational enough to make me want to come back as a member, but that has not been everyone's experience. What this code of conduct, this report and the work we have to do does is make sure that this is a workplace where people feel inspired, that the spark that brings them here isn't squashed by a toxic culture or a toxic workplace. That's what we all must commit ourselves to. As I said, we all recognise that this is a very different workplace to many, but being different does not let us off the hook for bad behaviour. It does not mean that we are so special that codes of conduct and norms of behaviour that apply across the country do not apply to us. It cannot be that. There is still work to be done. The standards make it clear that complaints made under the code will be taken seriously and dealt with confidentially and independently and that breaches will be met with effective sanctions. I strongly believe that the sanctions and consequences for actions will be an important part of bringing change to this place. The real test of these standards and codes is how we as parliamentarians uphold them—I very much hope that all of us across this place do dedicate ourselves to that, and that is what we are doing—and, in instances where they are not upheld, how we enforce them. Codes that we just pay lip-service to are not real codes, and they will not change the way that this place operates. As the Deputy Chair outlined in her speech, a lot of work has been done on how that system of consequences and enforcement will operate, and I know a lot of that work is still to come. That is work that, as a parliament, we all have to commit ourselves to. This is not a lip-service exercise. This is actually an exercise in changing this place and being genuine about that, and that means signing ourselves up for what comes through all of that. A big part of that will come through the establishment of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Commission and the way that that operates and is able to administer. We are not unique in being in this situation in our parliament. Across the Commonwealth, parliaments have looked at this issue of how codes of conduct should operate and what the consequences should be for that experience. So we can draw on those experiences from parliaments in the United Kingdom and in New Zealand—those who have already done some of this work so that we can benefit from their experience to make sure that the work we continue to do, as I said, is not just lip service towards codes of conduct that are really important but also has mechanisms that follow through on that and show both the Australian public and the people who work in this place that all of us as parliamentarians are genuine about this change. We know that we have not behaved. We have not set the standard in a way that we should have. As we recognise that we are at an important stage today, I think it is important to also understand that in some ways we are just at the beginning. It will take all of us, together, continuing to realise that this will have to be a focus—it's not a 'nice to have'; it's a 'must have'—to make sure that the code is effective. The work to establish the code has been done. I was really pleased, yesterday in the House and here today in the Federation Chamber, to hear so many members dedicating themselves to upholding the code and, on behalf of the political parties and movements they represent, also dedicating those wider movements towards the codes. We do now, as I said, need to put in place the structures that will ensure that, when breaches do occur, those breaches are dealt with appropriately and that, when misbehaviour or worse happens in this place, the perpetrator is held to account and those who have been impacted by that behaviour get the support and assistance they need. I'm going to finish again by thanking the people who came forward with their stories and their experience and their passion for making this a better parliament. We all benefit from that. Our country will benefit from that. We owe it to all those people—who have come forward, shared their experiences and done the work—to make this a better parliament and to dedicate ourselves to not just having these codes of conduct but implementing these codes of conduct, upholding them in all of our behaviour and making sure that this is a place that sets the standard for our country. 10:32 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi Yesterday both the House of Representatives and the Senate joined together to endorse the interim behaviour standards and code for parliamentarians, staff and Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. This is the first time parliament has had a code of conduct, which is extraordinary in itself. I came to this parliament in 2019 calling for a code of conduct, as did my predecessor, Cathy McGowan. From hospitals to university departments, I've worked in many, many workplaces in my career where codes of conduct offset the risk of power imbalances and harmful workplace environments from forming, and this workplace should be no exception. Members across both chambers have had similar experiences in their own workplaces before they came here. For me, as a person who believes in the power of consensus, this was a landmark moment for our parliament, and we shouldn't underestimate that. As one, with one voice, we recognise that we must do better. The public holds us to the highest standards of conduct, and so should we. The Set the standard report found that an unacceptably high number of people, particularly women, in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces experienced bullying, sexual harassment or actual or attempted sexual assault whilst at work. We've all seen the grave impacts of this. I certainly have. I sat down with brilliant people, full of potential, who came here to contribute to their country and who are now dealing with the consequences of a culture which disbelieved and sidelined them when they tried to speak up about that abuse. I thank those people and the many people who came forward subsequently for their bravery, which really sparked us into getting to work on this. It shouldn't have taken that, but it did, and we must now honour their bravery. As an MP with a young and mostly female staff, I do not want them to feel threatened in their workplace. As an MP who hosts volunteers from my electorate in parliament every single sitting week, I want their time here to be a catalysing moment that shapes their lives, not one that casts a long shadow. Since the Set the standard report was published, I've used my voice to demand the implementation of all recommendations. The government has accepted this, but only six have been implemented in the year since it was tabled and we need to pick up the pace. We can't afford for change to be slow. While endorsing the behaviour standards and code was an important step for progress, it's nowhere near enough. The question now is how these standards will be enforced and what penalties will apply when they are transgressed. While I believe that people in this place do want to lead by example, we need to have real penalties for inappropriate conduct to have severe consequences. The Set the standard report called for an independent parliamentary standards commission to enforce the code of conduct. The report specifically recommended that the commission be empowered to investigate and make findings of fact about the alleged breaches of the code of conduct and make recommendations for sanctions. These powers reflect my call in 2020 with the Commonwealth Parliamentary Standards Bill, which included a code of conduct and that I was pleased to introduce as a private member's bill. It called for a commissioner who could assess, investigate, resolve or refer serious alleged breaches of the new code of conduct. I was really pleased to share detailed information about the proposal with the Jenkins review and, indeed, with the committee. Again, I thank them for listening and I thank them for their work. The Prime Minister said that the independent parliamentary standards commission will be established later this year. It is good—very good—that this is a priority, and it needs to have serious powers so it can deliver on the important role. For instance, this commission should have the same powers as the Auditor-General to conduct investigations with appropriate safeguards to protect the rights of people under investigation. As I did with the establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Commission, I really look forward to working with this government to make sure that the oversight body meets the standards of the Australian people and that bad behaviour is never again swept under the rug. Our position as elected officials should never trump the safety of the people who come to work in this place. In closing, I want to thank all the members of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards, led so well by the member for Newcastle. These members worked hard to produce the interim behaviour standards and code. I particularly thank my colleague here, the member for North Sydney who outside of this place campaigned for a binding code of conduct to address bad behaviour and has followed through with passion and commitment now as a member of parliament. Thank you. Now, colleagues, it's up to us. We owe it to the Australian public to lead and to deliver the cultural and systemic change to make this a safe and respectful workplace. 10:38 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I rise to endorse the interim code of conduct. I speak as a member of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards, which developed and worked particularly hard to consult, to listen, to think, to work together and to share our experience in bringing together the interim standards and codes in a way that thought about where we work, the people we work with and for and the people we represent. Respect at work is something we've heard a lot about. I spent nearly three decades working in schools. The first 10 years of that work in schools was in a classroom, not in leadership of adults, or grown-ups as we call them in schools. There were always debates about student behaviour. They would dominate a school if not dealt with appropriately. I've been involved in many cultural change moments, if you like, planned cultural change moments, where school communities would come together to agree on a set of values, to agree on a code of behaviour, to agree on non-negotiables in that community. And that is what we are doing here. That is all we are doing here. We are putting before our colleagues this summation of what respect looks like, and we're pleased that they are affirming what we have put down on paper to be real. That's what this document is. From my classroom days to leading schools as a principal I've done enough change management, I've been involved in enough of these situations to know that human behaviour is not lineal. It is not singular. Everyone of us has different motivations, different drives. Some young people need high expectations and they will do whatever it takes to meet the expectations of someone that they respect. Some young people need clear guidelines. They need to know, 'What can I not do, and what will happen to me if I do it?' For some children that's really important. What we're trying to do in this document, and in this process as a parliament, is to say, 'This is how we agree we should work.' We're trying to put in place all of the parameters for the individuals who work with us so that we can meet their needs and help them to manage their behaviours. That's putting it bluntly; that's what's happening here. In this place we are referred to as 'honourable members'. We have standing orders. We refer to one another by the names of the areas that we represent, by our divisions. I am in this chamber the member for Lalor. I am addressed every morning, in the opening of parliament, by a Speaker who says, 'honourable members'. Parliaments were established with those notions that people's behaviour would meet that expectation. There's a reason why we're called 'honourable members' first thing every day. It's to remind us that the one expectation of this place is that we behave honourably. It doesn't appear in our new code of conduct because it's there every day in our standing orders. The driving force in this is about acknowledging that we have power and influence and ensuring that we understand that power and that we don't misuse it. That we understand what respect means. If I do an audit in a school, which I have done many of, I can see shared values plastered on the walls in this school. I can see codes of conduct. I can even sometimes see what the sanctions will be if they are breached. They're all around the school. To test whether those are alive, to test whether they're being lived and are not just words on a page, I would ask a child, 'Can you tell me what respect looks like?' That's what we do: 'Can you tell me what respect looks like?' The best answer to that question I've ever had was from a primary school child who said, 'It's about knowing how to say someone's name properly.' That went to the very core of me, that a child could understand that identity is critical to feeling dignity. A child can't articulate that, but this child could say to me respect is about knowing how to say people's names properly. I'm from a very multicultural community and the school I'm talking about will have variations on a theme in terms of pronunciations of names. But it touched me because, as a teacher, that was always really important to me. It was important to me because I found a student in my classroom who, when it came to Year 12, when it came to registering for the exams, their name did not exist. They had been told on entering the school, in their entry interview, that they should adopt themselves an Anglo name that would be easy for people to say. That is about identity and that is about dignity and that is about respect. It stayed with me forever. So in my classroom—I'm not particularly good at pronunciation; I'm a single-language speaker. Lots of ways of making sounds were eliminated in me by the time I started school, so it's a struggle. I can't roll my Rs very well; I have to really concentrate. So it's always been important for me in my classroom to ensure that I am saying someone's name the way they choose to say it. That's what respect is. That's all this is about. We're hearing a lot about the acceptance here, or the fact that bad behaviours have been tolerated. Parliament has always had hues, hints, in the ways we deal with one another—it's there embedded—but this is a modern way for us to come together and say: 'What does respect look like? How would I like to be treated? How do I want to treat others?' With these codes, if I sat with every individual in this parliament and said, 'Can you agree to this?" their answer would be a resounding 'yes'. We also need to put in place the things that go around this. And, yes, for some people, the sanctions are the primary thought. I may have a different view, which I may have expressed a lot. Cultural change does things to people. We ask people; we tell people, 'Use the word "change".' For some people that triggers an anxiety about change. We need to be mindful, as we work through this process and in our conversations with one another, that everybody responds differently when they're confronted with change. So there will be some people for whom this is causing anxiety. I urge everybody across the parliament: if you're feeling even a slightly little bit anxious about what you're hearing from your colleagues, go to the pieces of paper and ask yourself, 'Is there anything in this document that I wouldn't ask someone of else and that I cannot ask of myself?' The answer is, 'Of course there isn't.' Of course we can all can agree that we want to act respectfully, professionally and with integrity. This change is not a challenge for parliamentarians. I will finish by saying that, if we can ask five-year-olds in our classrooms to agree to a set of values, to agree to a code of behaviour, and if we can put the energy into five-year-olds to find ways for them to manage their own behaviour, then we can ask that of representatives in this place. When I say 'the member the North Sydney', and thank you for your work; when I say 'the member the Newcastle', and thank you for your work; when I say 'the member for Hawke'; when I say 'the member for Dunkley'; and when I say 'the member for Canberra', I am showing respect. It's built into the way we do things in this place. This is an extension of that. It's an acknowledgement of the fact that there have been behaviours in this workplace that have mortified us, and we commit to do better. And we want processes in place to ensure, as the member for Indi said so eloquently, that things are never swept under the carpet, that we have ways of moving forward. For some people, that may require heavy sanctions until they learn to control those behaviours. For other people, it may require a conversation, a mediation and a change in behaviour. For some people, they just need to know that it makes somebody else feel anxious or feel that they're being disrespected. I commend the work of the committee to the House, I look forward to the way forward, and I want to thank the member for Newcastle for incredible leadership. 10:48 Ms TINK 300124 North Sydney For many Australians it would seem completely illogical that, up until yesterday, there was no binding code of conduct for parliamentarians, their staff or people visiting a parliamentary workplace. While I don't have specific figures, I dare say most Australians in the real world are bound by some form of code of conduct, wherever they may find themselves, be that a work environment, schools or even in public venues, where we are often asked to abide by a set of behavioural standards or face expulsion. Certainly for me, as someone who's worked for over 35 years now, I can only think of two occasions where I was not required to acknowledge and sign a binding code of conduct as I commenced work. Both of these occurred when I was much younger, working in casual jobs for small businesses in a small country town. While I wasn't asked to sign anything, the expectations of my behaviour were certainly made very clear to me both verbally and through the actions of those around me. Time, though, has moved on since those experiences of mine, and, given the great value offered by common codes of conduct and their ubiquitous nature across all environments, why should it have been the case that that same expectation was not, until now, applied to this place? The Respect@Work report completed by the Australian Human Rights Commissioner in March 2020 was a milestone moment not just for our country but also for this place. Its findings shone a light on the inadequacy of our current legal and regulatory system in Australia to deal with the prevalence and pervasiveness of workplace sexual harassment. It particularly identified and called out the weaknesses in this place, a place which should be one which consistently models the highest standards of behaviour, and the role the Set the standard report has subsequently played in moving this place's culture in a new direction should not be underestimated. A survey conducted at the time as part of the report found that one in three people working in this building had personally experienced sexual harassment at work and that over half had experienced at least one instance of bullying, harassment or assault. Those numbers are obviously unacceptable. As the highest office holders in the land, federal politicians must be held to the highest standards. For me, the delivery of the Respect@Work report was a galvanising moment. It followed what I saw as the appalling treatment of our first female Prime Minister, the Hon. Julia Gillard; Brittany Higgins's brave expression of her experiences; Julia Banks's accounting of her time in parliament; reports of Bridget Archer's treatment within parliament; and Annabel Crabb's series Ms Represented. Having witnessed all of these things and learning of the findings of the Set the standard report, I couldn't escape a feeling that I had to do something. So I decided, as someone who had been voting for over 30 years, I had to accept the role that I'd played in enabling it and find a way to change it irrevocably for the better. It was at this time that some people within my community approached me to see if I would run as an Independent for the seat of North Sydney. While it was not something that I had ever foreseen myself doing, I said yes, not because I had any ideas of grandeur or entitlement—in fact the idea, then and even today, sometimes scares me—but because I believed that if I could help drive a higher-profile discussion about the reform needed at this level simply by campaigning on this and other topics then the personal cost of saying yes would be worth it. It's within this context, then, that I committed that if elected as the member for North Sydney I would do whatever I could to ensure the recommendations of the Set the standard report were realised. At this point, I want to sincerely thank the far too many courageous victims-survivors and everyone who bravely shared their stories to inform this important work. I also want to thank the commissioner, Kate Jenkins, for her fearlessness. The Respect@Work report and the Set the standard report were both developed following 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, including this one. It is with great pride that I stand here today to welcome the motion moved in the House yesterday that saw our parliament unite to endorse the draft behaviour standards and codes of conduct as presented in the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards Final report last year. I had the privilege of being part of that committee, and I would like to especially thank our chair, the Deputy Speaker and member for Newcastle, Ms Sharon Claydon; our deputy chair, Senator Marise Payne; and all of my committee colleagues, including the member for Lalor, Ms Joanne Ryan, who was recently in the chamber this morning, for their time, dedication and fierce advocacy. Working together, this committee developed behaviour standards which set clear expectations of upholding laws that support safe and respectful workplaces, including laws regarding bullying, harassment, sexual harassment or assault, and discrimination in any form. But merely obeying the law is not going to be good enough. The committee set clear guidelines which focus on ensuring respectful behaviour, encouraging diverse perspectives and, recognising the power and influence we have, ensuring not to abuse it. These documents were not developed lightly. They have been scrutinised, reviewed, debated, rewritten, reviewed and then presented. It has taken literally hundreds of hours over a very short period of time, and it says everything about this process, the leaders of that committee and the way this House is now behaving that we were ultimately united and the report was presented unanimously. Our parliament has been considering codes of conduct for almost half a century, with a report in 1975 noting that a 'meaningful code of conduct should exist' in this place. Since then, many members in this place have tried, but they have failed. At the last election people made it clear that they expect and demand a higher standard of conduct from their MPs, and, as a member of the committee which developed the draft code of conduct, I'm proud to say we have now finally delivered. With over 4,000 people working in Parliament House on any given sitting day and thousands more working in the country across electoral offices, all the people in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces must be safe. It was the courage of Brittany Higgins and many before her that resulted in the Jenkins review. Its recommendations led to the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce and the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards. Yesterday's announcement in parliament that the draft code of conduct prepared by the committee will be endorsed and adopted is a win for all those who want to see politics done differently. Like all other members of the committee, I strongly support the recommendation to establish a confidential, independent and serious investigative body with an effective sanctions regime to drive long-term cultural change. I am confident that this work is being done and will be realised. This body will have teeth. There will be tangible consequences such as sanctions and possibly even suspension. But it must be noted: we are not waiting for the establishment of that body. We will move ahead with these new expectations of behaviour from today. I was sent by the people of North Sydney to help change the culture in our federal politics for the better, knowing full well that changing any culture is always one of the hardest things to do in any environment. But, in the last 24 hours, we have taken one of the most significant steps we can towards change. We have adopted a common language of standards that we can expect of each other, and we have committed to holding not only ourselves to those standards but being brave and courageous in holding our peers to those same standards as we interact with them. The climate in Canberra is changing, and the people of North Sydney can be proud of the role that we've played in moving this agenda forward and in the commitment we will take forward, ensuring we remain a positive and supportive voice in this environment. 10:57 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra I rise in strong support of the Prime Minister's motion. Yesterday, the Prime Minister said in the House: Parliament House will never be a typical workplace, but it must be a safe workplace, a respectful workplace, a workplace that lives up to the ideals our democracy is built on—equality, fairness, decency and respect for all—and a workplace worthy of the nation and the people we are called here to serve … And he is absolutely right. That's why I'm very proud to stand here today as the parliament adopts, for the first time ever, standards and a code of conduct. I want to pay particular tribute to my friend and colleague, the member for Newcastle, Deputy Speaker of the House, who chaired the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards, and all the members of that committee from across political persuasions who worked to develop this code of conduct. It was presented unanimously, and that is really significant because these are issues that are across the political divide. It affects people from all sides of politics, and this is a unifying moment for this parliament as we come together to adopt these standards and a code of conduct for the first time. It's very important that this House acknowledges the unacceptable history of workplace bullying, sexual harassment and sexual assault in Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces. I'm very proud that we're taking this action. It's been a year since Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins's landmark Set the standard report was formally acknowledged by this parliament. The title of that report is apt because people expect this workplace to set the standard. It should be a place that other workplaces look up to. In March 2021, thousands and thousands of women across Australia marched for justice, and they said, 'Enough is enough.' I was proud, with many of my colleagues, to go out to the march outside Parliament House and to gather with women who were tired of the sexism, the harassment and even assaults that women are subjected to, and this was, of course, sparked by the bravery of Brittany Higgins in coming forward with her story. This resonated with people because it was about not just what was going on in Parliament House that was completely unacceptable but what was going on in workplaces, in the community, in homes all around our country. What it said was that people did want to see the parliament—as a workplace, as an institution—do better and set the standard, and in adopting this code of conduct we begin that really important work. I want to talk a little bit about parliamentary staff, because I think there's often a lot of misunderstanding in the community about the role that these staff actually have. These people work incredibly hard for incredibly long hours with incredible dedication. They are some of the most clever and smart and concerned people in this country, who come here to work because they believe in the power of this place to make changes for the lives of Australians. For many, as people have talked about, it is a dream job to come and work here—to be part of making that change. That is something that I can relate to, having worked as a staffer in the past myself. To me, it was just a dream come true to come and work in this place. For too many people, though, they have had disastrous experiences here that never should have happened in a workplace that should have been respectful and that should not have subjected people to sexism, to harassment and even to assault and attempted assault. I really want to thank and acknowledge the people who bravely came and shared their stories as part of that Kate Jenkins report and review, because that isn't easy, and it is because of that that we are here making that change. I hope that this brings some hope to people who have, very wrongfully, had those experiences and that it begins a path to changing this place, which I believe we are already on, since those discussions began. I think there really has been a reckoning in this place and there is a need for people to do things differently. As the Prime Minister has said, it will never be a typical workplace. There will always be long hours. There will always be a bit of chaos here. Part of the problem here is that people who come into this place do have a lot of power, and what this code of conduct is asking people to do, in part, is to be mindful of that and not to abuse that. I think that is really key to this. What is key to this is having respect for one another as human beings. I'm very proud of the work that the joint select committee has done to come up with this, and I'm proud that our parliament is adopting this. It's very important. The commissioner made a number of findings about the need for urgent and immediate reform and, importantly, for long-term cultural change—changes that will make this workplace safer and more respectful and a worthy exemplar for other workplaces around the country. As I say, we are heeding these findings, and the government has since been working collaboratively across the parliament to implement the report recommendations so we can deliver safer and more respectful parliamentary workplaces. Everyone should feel safe when they go to work, and, as I say, absolutely in this building people should always feel safe. This building should set the standard for workplaces around the country, and that's what this is about. The parliament also took action last year, when Minister Gallagher announced that the new human resources body for parliamentarians and staff would be established as an independent statutory agency. We are enhancing the existing Parliamentary Workplace Support Service, which has already built the trust and confidence of staff and colleagues. Importantly, part of this step today is that complaints made under the code of conduct will be taken seriously and they will be dealt with independently and confidentially. In the past, many have said that when they've made complaints they've felt that it has been managed or swept under the rug as a political problem to solve. This is about taking this seriously, dealing with it independently and creating that mechanism to deal with these complaints so that everyone can feel safe in this workplace. We want this to be a workplace where we can all feel safe and all be proud of the culture here. Again, I really want to commend the work of the member for Newcastle and all members on that committee and everyone in this parliament who supports this and who is going to work together to make this a safe, respectful and equal workplace. 11:05 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley As with my colleagues, I'm incredibly proud to be part of a government and a parliament that is introducing this code and looking to implement all of the recommendations of the Set the standard report. But I have to be honest: I'm also ashamed and pretty perplexed that we had to do it in the first place. It is extraordinary, really, that we had to have the Sex Discrimination Commissioner do an inquiry into the way people have been treated in political offices and in this parliament and uncover the extent of the horrendous experiences that people have had. It reflects shame on the people who have worked here over the decades that are covered by some of those complaints in Kate Jenkins's report. And I think we have to be really frank and honest about this: it also reflects gender inequality and power imbalance. Not all of the complaints were experiences from women where the horrendous, bad and illegal behaviour was undertaken by men. Not all of them were, but predominantly they were. Let's be honest about it: it arises most frequently in circumstances where the man is in a position of power and the woman isn't. I think that's why, when this motion was spoken to in the main chamber, almost all of the speakers—who coincidentally were men—emphasised the number of women that are now in this parliament and the number of women that are now in their parties. I think only one of them, the Prime Minister, could actually stand up there and say with great authenticity that he is the leader of a party which has gender equality in the party room. All of those who lead parties where women are now almost equally represented should be proud of that. We're proud of that, and it makes a difference. But it's not enough. We have to acknowledge in this conversation that what has occurred in this place and what occurs across Australia is behaviour by men towards women which is about an abuse of power or authority or control and which at its heart comes from gender inequality and outdated, wrong stereotypes about the roles of men and women and their relative places in society. I want to put on the record as part of this speech—and I would like men in authority in this place and in this chamber to listen and hear this message—women are not inherently vulnerable. We are not fragile creatures that are asking for protection from men. We don't want protection. We want respect and we want equality. It is well intentioned, I know, when men talk about protecting women from violence and sexual assault. We don't want to be protected; we want it to stop. And the way it's going to stop is to continue on the path that we are on, thankfully, of understanding that women are autonomous, strong, courageous, flawed individuals who deserve respect and equality in the same way as any man does. When we get there then, hopefully, we aren't going to need codes of behaviour. When we get there, hopefully, we're not going to need to give speeches over and over again about not abusing power and influence or authority, because people who have them will be both men and women; and people who have those positions of power, influence or authority will inherently treat everyone who works for them or with them with the respect that you give to someone who you consider to be another human being, simply that, not someone who you consider to be your equal because others aren't, or someone you consider to be someone you need to protect because they're a bit vulnerable, or not someone that you consider to be your superior, that you need their approval, just someone you consider to be another human being who, therefore, deserves your respect and is equal. It is just great—I guess that's the word for it—that we are now going to have a code of conduct. When all of the scandals in this place broke years ago that led to this inquiry happening, I agreed with others who said we should have an independent body that can investigate and review allegations against members of this place and that there should be the ability to recommend sanctions. We can look at other models around the world. Ultimately, the parliament as a group of individual parliamentarians, not as members of parties and governments and oppositions, should take on the responsibility of receiving reports from an independent body about allegations of improper, illegal or unacceptable behaviour and vote on what we think should happen to the person who has been found to have committed them. If we're going to set the standard and have a code then we also have to commit to upholding it ourselves, not just in our individual lives but in relation to other people, our colleagues, who are in this place. The Commonwealth parliamentary workplace guidelines say that people must behave towards each other 'professionally, respectfully and with integrity'. If anyone needed to be told that, it's not clear to me what they're doing here. That's what we have to do: we have to act professionally, respectfully and with integrity. We have to 'Encourage and value diverse perspectives and recognise the importance of a free exchange of ideas.' This next one is absolutely crucial and, again, it really warrants reflecting on why it has to be said: 'Recognise your power, influence or authority and do not abuse them.' Treat the people that you work with, even when you're their boss, as your colleagues. Treat them as people with their own personalities, their own positives, their own challenges, their own skills and attributes. Treat them as people. Recognise that you have power, influence and authority over the people you work with, who are in your office, who are in this place, and don't abuse it. It's as simple as that. Everything else that's in this, which I don't need to read out because other people have, is fundamental to how we should all just conduct ourselves as people. I want to finish a bit where I started. When we get to a place of gender equality where men and women recognise each other as different but equals, when there are as many women in positions of power as there are men, when staff are young men and young woman, old men and old women, and people from diverse backgrounds who all work together—because this is a magnificent place to work and an important mission—and treat each other as people, that's when, hopefully, we're not going to need any codes of conduct anymore. 11:15 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner I first worked in this building in 1988 doing work experience for the then member for Fraser, John Langmore. I came back to work as a staffer for the late Senator Peter Cook from 1998 to 2000, and I've had the privilege of serving in this place as a member, first for Fraser and then for Fenner, since 2010, so I've seen the culture in the parliament evolve. I've seen it change from a building which was almost entirely a parliament of men to now being much more gender diverse. I've seen it become a little more caring and I've seen the rise of the #MeToo movement, that very welcome rally that said it was about time that we had gender equity in this country. But other things haven't changed. This still remains one of the very few workplaces in Australia where it's considered acceptable to shout insults at your co-workers while they are trying to do their jobs. It still remains a place in which there are highly personal attacks made on people for political reasons, and the rise of anonymous social media has worsened that particular cesspool. We've seen pile-ons which have challenged the mental health of many. Just think about the impact on former Senator Nick Sherry from the partisan attacks which caused him to attempt to take his life. Many who have been in the eye of the storm during the 12 years that I've been in this parliament have spoken to me about the way in which that affects their mental health. In courts, the Commonwealth seeks to be a model litigant. It seeks to behave in the courts as it would hope other litigants behave, so we, too, in this parliament should seek to set the standard. We should seek to be the kind of workplace we expect other workplaces in Australia to be. My former colleague at the Australian National University Professor Deborah Cobb-Clark researched extensively the issue of sexual harassment and the way in which that widened the gender pay gap. Professor Cobb-Clark made the point that the impact of sexual harassment can be particularly pernicious when it prevents women from pursuing careers which are high-stress and require long and unsociable hours. In a workplace with sexual harassment, many talented women will simply choose not to put themselves into a position of vulnerability, which is effectively not to seek leadership roles in many organisations. Professor Cobb-Clark's research showed that reducing sexual harassment has a massive impact on reducing the gender pay gap and on productivity because it's not just those women, their families and their loved ones who benefit directly but the organisations themselves that are able to make productive use of those women's skills because they are pursuing high-impact careers. That's nowhere truer than in politics, where a culture of sexual harassment and sexual bullying is most likely to deter talented women, those who might feel that they have a contribution to make but simply aren't willing to put themselves into the cauldron of abuse and misogyny. One of the fears that I had during the worst experiences of sexism that I've seen in this building, the misogynistic attacks on former Prime Minister Julia Gillard, was that Prime Minister Gillard herself could handle it. But I worried about the number of talented women thinking about politics who looked at the signs that the former opposition leader stood in front of, looked at the callous treatment to which she was subjected, the misogyny and the abuse, and said, 'Politics isn't for me.' That was my greatest fear at the time. These reforms we're discussing today are an important first step forward, but they won't be the final step. This will be an ongoing journey as the parliament seeks to set the standard for the Australian community. Like many others, I've benefited from the training that was provided on dealing with sexual harassment and bullying complaints. In my case, as for, I understand, a majority of senators and members, my training was provided by PwC's Julie McKay who formerly headed up UN Women. I want to acknowledge Julie for her thoughtful leadership and for the way in which, through that unstructured session, she was able to teach me a great deal. I believe she is somebody who has made a huge contribution to improving the culture of this place, and I thank her for that. I thank, too, Kate Jenkins for her two important reports, Respect@Work and Set the standard, which have brought together an enormous body of work and encouraged us to tackle these issues. I want to thank, too, the member for Newcastle, Sharon Claydon. I was one of those who spoke to the member for Newcastle's Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards, and I provided evidence in camera relating to the 10 principles of politics that I'd set up in my office. Some years ago, I worked with my staff to develop 10 principles that hang on the walls of our offices and seek to epitomise what we do. I've encouraged other members of parliament to adopt some principles document for themselves because many organisations, non-profit and for-profit alike, have mission statements, goals, codes of conduct, and yet we haven't had those. I seek leave to incorporate the 10 principles of politics document into Hansard. Leave granted. The document read as follows— Principles of Politics Office of Andrew Leigh MP 1. How we practice politics can be as important as the policies we pursue. Since this is politics, we'll never be universally popular. But we should treat co-workers, constituents and colleagues with respect and dignity. This is especially important when dealing with vulnerable constituents. 2. Our communications should try to engage with the better instincts of Australia, to tell stories, make new arguments, and convey fresh facts. When we dumb down debates and demonise our opponents, progressives lose. When we enrich the public conversation, we win. 3. None of us would be here without the Labor Party. It is Australia's oldest and greatest political party, and will outlast all of us. We have a responsibility to cherish its traditions, make it stronger and more democratic, and help Labor win elections. 4. When we cannot help someone, we should tell them honestly, and use that time to help others; particularly the most disadvantaged. 5. We should be working on the most important things possible—big ideas, critical questions, major community issues. The only way to get the space to do this is to say no to less important priorities. We can do anything, but we cannot do everything. 6. Experimenting is good, and learning from our mistakes is healthy—but only if we share what we've learned with our team and our Labor colleagues. 7. Envy and hate are two of the biggest timewasters in politics. Media coverage is a means, not an end. Working in politics is a privilege, and we're lucky to do it. Our office should be the positive, respectful and safe work environment we would want for every employee in the country. 8. Wherever possible, we should draw on the strengths of diversity, and collaborate with colleagues on policies, campaigns and events. Labor is the party of "we", not "me". 9. Don't apologise for spending time with friends and family, exercising or reading fiction. Not only is socialising important in itself; a well-rounded life helps us do our jobs better. Strive for calmness, balance and gratitude. 10. Act ethically, crack jokes when we can, and keep a sense of perspective. The typical career lasts around 80,000 hours. Let's make them count. Dr LEIGH BU8 I thank the opposition. I now go to a number of recommendations in the report. It will be vital to have an external independent review, following up and ensuring that there is high-quality implementation right across a range of diverse workplaces. Recommendation 4 speaks about individual leadership and recognises that, in this place, the offices of members and senators can sometimes have a character that's a bit like the character of a small business. For those of us who are part of a major party, perhaps that's a franchise business, but each office operates differently and sometimes the standards of those offices can be very different. I've heard stories, for example, of staff from departments who worked in ministerial offices under the former government as departmental liaison officers. They were referred to by other members in that office not by their names, but by just as 'DLO'. 'Hey, DLO, go and do this,' or 'Hey, DLO, go and do that.' That's no way to treat a co-worker. Recommendation 5 speaks about diversity among parliamentarians. I'm proud to stand here as a member of a party where, of the 103 members of the Labor caucus, 54 are women, and as part of an Albanese government in which half of the members of cabinet are women. Recommendation 7 goes to measurement and public reporting and focuses on diversity characteristics which I hope will go beyond gender to also look at race and ethnicity. Recommendation 10 speaks about everyday respect in the parliamentary chambers. Again, I hark back to that period from 2010 to 2013 in which then opposition leader Abbott spoke about the need for an election so the Prime Minister could 'make an honest woman of herself', in which then opposition leader Abbott stood in front of signs saying 'ditch the witch', in which then opposition leader Abbott would frequently refer in the parliament to 'Julia' rather than to 'the Prime Minister', as would have been done for a male prime minister. That low standard was something which Prime Minister Gillard didn't focus on. She didn't speak much about that behaviour. But, looking back, I feel that, even as a newly minted backbencher, I should have done more to call out the everyday sexism that I saw there in the House of Representatives chamber. There will be monitoring, evaluation and continuous improvement, under recommendation 19, and I hope that will also include reporting, by party, of harassment claims. Finally, I want to thank the Leader of the House, Tony Burke, for the change to standing orders that allows me to go home to my kids at 6.30. That is, indeed, a way of setting the standard. (Time expired) 11:25 Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Lingiari The standard you walk past is the standard you accept, and that has never been truer than for this building. How can we expect workplaces around the country to be safe and supported if we can't uphold standards here? For me, this issue is particularly pertinent. In my electorate of Lingiari, we have a range of complex workplaces, particularly out bush. Women and, indeed, all our workers, deserve to feel safe, supported and encouraged. I've worked in a whole range of industries across a career that has been many decades in the making. I was just listening to my colleague talking about what former prime minister Julia Gillard had gone through. I remember coming into parliament in the Northern Territory as the new member for Arafura; it was such a joyous occasion in that, for the first time since self-government, we had a female chief minister. Not only do I feel proud of that time; standing side by side with Clare Martin, who was our first chief minister in the whole time since self-government in the Northern Territory, I remember being quite shocked at the bullying and the boorish behaviour of people, with the Chief Minister wanting to change the culture of how politics was seen in the Northern Territory. There was a cowboy attitude—and I'm not being disrespectful to anyone—and just the way she was treated. I remember working in some of those industries and dealing with former chief ministers from the CLP government and seeing the difference in how they were treated versus how Clare, as the first female Chief Minister, was treated. In going to many meetings, not just as a minister in the Northern Territory government but as a member, people would be turning to see whether there was an adviser with me or looking at me as if I were the adviser, not the member. They were just not recognising my role at all and were putting that down. As someone brought up in a household of 11 children, my parents had always been at pains to 'treat people how you want to be treated', and that was brought home to me. My mother was a very strict Catholic, so there was the Catholic upbringing and teachings. My father believed in a strong education. He didn't have much, but one of the things he did say to the 11 of us was, 'I'm go to make sure you get a good education,' so you would be able to work that out. Running many organisations in the Northern Territory, from the Top End to the Centre, at every moment the safety of people who worked with me was paramount, and that included not just female staff but also male staff. I know that people's workplaces can affect their entire lives. More than that, as a leader, I had an obligation to those around me and to those who looked after me for safety, so if I wanted that I had to replicate that. A workplace is not simply a place for you to go and get paid; it's a place that you draw meaning from and it's a place where you're meant to feel valued and that you're making a contribution, and nowhere is that truer than in this parliament. Since coming to federal parliament, I have reflected on the differences between what I saw in the Northern Territory, or the state parliament, and coming into this parliament, and seeing the differences in my role as a representative. The member for Durack and I often debate whose electorate is bigger—Durack or Lingiari—but Lingiari is so culturally diverse, from the pastoral areas to the urban centres. There are many workplaces amongst that diversity, and, in my role in this parliament, I have a responsibility back to them. I see this parliament as having a responsibility to its workers, to the people who support us as parliamentarians, but we also have a responsibility to set the standard for all workplaces across the country. Parliament, like workplaces in my electorate, will never be a conventional workplace; the bells ringing late in the afternoon, a dash to the chamber, is a constant reminder of that, yet this place must be a safe, inclusive and accepting place to work. There are no excuses. There is no accepting anything less. The only reason we can do our jobs as members of parliament is that we have an army of workers to help us—our staff, the clerks, the security guards, the baristas, the drivers, the cooks, the chamber attendants and many more who work in this building to make our lives just a little bit easier. I think we have an obligation: staff make our lives easier, and we have a duty of care to everyone who works in this building. In speaking on this issue, I think particularly of the women who have worked in this building before me, juggling babies on one arm and binders of documents on the other. I think of the staff dedicating hours upon hours of their lives to the cause of Australian democracy. I also reflect on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members, particularly Indigenous women, and the emotions this place must have stirred. I think of women who deserve to be safe in this place, whether or not they have a different view from others. We need to appreciate that we are not always going to agree. We need to accept and respect that people have their own opinions. It is these thoughts that we must keep close to our hearts as we walk around this building. We must and we will do better. We cannot avoid the gendered aspect of this. The report is not like others this place has received. It speaks directly to the behaviour of our representatives and their staff. It speaks to the heart of the very operating environment of decisions and policymaking. A code of conduct is not simply a set of words or a piece of paper to sign; it has to be a commitment to change the way our democracy works and to call on all workplaces to be better. I want to acknowledge the work of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards, particularly that of the chair, who I have come to see as not only a friend but also a mentor, and that's the member for Newcastle, Sharon Claydon. Changing the culture of this place takes a big effort and strong leadership. I also want to thank the Prime Minister for his leadership on this issue. His speech yesterday was a powerful one. Setting the standard is the responsibility of all of us, and we must all step up to contribute. The work has been done to report on a clear path forward towards making this place a better environment. The structures have been outlined and a code of conduct has been developed. It is now over to all of us to implement this interim report and to make sure that we implement it in full. 11:34 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke by leave—I move: That further proceedings be conducted in the House. Question agreed to. BILLS 573 BILLS Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022 573

Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading 573 11:35 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm I would hope that everyone in this House cares about workplace health and safety. It's certainly been something that the labour movement and the Labor Party have prioritised for hundreds of years, and it is one of the very reasons that we came into existence as a political party. When we look back in our history, we think about the early issues that workers took industrial action on in my state of Victoria, which were around workplace health and safety—specifically the conditions in factories, which resulted in both the factory acts and the tailoresses strike of the late 19th century. More recently, we've seen action being taken on workplaces on construction sites around the use of asbestos. And, of course, very poignantly, this week we're taking action on bullying, harassment and discrimination by implementing a code of conduct in this place as part of the implementation of recommendations from the Set the standard inquiry and report. Not only has our government taken that step but we've also made sure that all key recommendations of the Respect@Work report were implemented, including, very importantly, the positive duty for employers to make sure that their workplaces are free of victimisation, bullying and harassment. All of this work throughout history to make sure that people are safe at work requires ongoing efforts. We need to always be vigilant in making sure that everyone who goes to work comes home from work. This bill, the Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022, is about us implementing recommendations from the Boland report, which was conducted a couple of years ago. In my previous workplaces, I fought for improvements in workplace health and safety, and I am genuinely pleased to be speaking in favour of a bill that will make sure that workers are safer, by ensuring that this is an issue that's taken even more seriously by everyone in a workplace, and also that there are more options for workplace health and safety representatives, who are absolutely vital, to choose training courses that are most appropriate and best suited to their needs. Quite obviously—it goes without saying—workplace deaths are devastating. While this bill does not introduce industrial manslaughter, Labor is committed to this reform, which lines up with the work of states and territories such as my home state of Victoria. Injuries at work, whether physical or psychosocial, have the capacity to destroy lives, livelihoods and families, and the more can be done to prevent these sorts of injuries, and to foster more positive and safer and healthier workplace cultures, the better. I've worked and spoken with so many workers who have been injured on the job, and often these injuries cause other harms, such as the psychosocial consequences of a physical injury. It is really difficult and devastating to see what happens to workers' lives as a result of injuries sustained at work, so we all need to do more to make sure that everyone is safe and healthy. This bill makes amendments to align the Commonwealth Work Health and Safety Act 2011, the WHS Act, with the recently amended model Work Health and Safety Act, published by Safe Work Australia in the model work health and safety laws. As noted earlier, these amendments are implementing the recommendations made in the Boland review by Ms Marie Boland, who took on the job in 2018. Amendments to the act include providing negligence as an alternative fault element for category 1 offences; prohibiting insurance for work health and safety fines; clarifying that health and safety representatives are entitled to choose a course of training; aligning various processes for issuing and serving notices; and some other technical and clarifying amendments. The bill will also amend the Safe Work Australia Act 2008 to clarify that relevant information can be shared with Safe Work Australia from work health and safety regulators, workers compensation authorities and other persons. This part of the bill, while not implementing a Boland review recommendation, was included at the request of Safe Work Australia. So this bill will strengthen our national approach to managing work health and safety by implementing key recommendations of the Boland review; promote a nationally consistent approach to work health and safety; and ensure that Safe Work Australia has the capacity to receive relevant information to perform its research and policy development functions, which are really critical, because, as I mentioned before, workplace health and safety and making sure that our workplaces are as good as they can be requires ongoing vigilance, research and reform. An extensive tripartite consultation process on these amendments has been undertaken with the community and business to make sure that we can get the alignment right. Comcare was consulted on the amendments to the Commonwealth work health and safety legislative framework and the implementation time frames. State and territory jurisdictions were consulted on the amendments to facilitate information sharing with Safe Work Australia, and amendments to the draft bill, as noted before, and to its explanatory memorandum were included to address their concerns. This is a really important first tranche of legislative reforms from the Boland review, and these are minor and technical in nature. The model work health and safety laws were independently reviewed, and we are now implementing a number of the recommendations to come from that. For those who don't know, work health and safety in Australia is legislated and regulated separately by each of Australia's state, territory and Commonwealth jurisdictions. Despite that, they're largely harmonised across the jurisdictions through a set of uniform laws, the model work health safety laws. Adoption of these recommendations has been through a robust tripartite consultation process involving all jurisdictions, as well as employer and worker representatives. Our government is committed, as all Labor governments through history have been, to ensuring Australian workers have safe and fair workplaces. This is just the first step of implementing our work health and safety reforms, and anything we can do to make workplaces healthier and safer is surely something this parliament can agree is a good thing. I'm very proud to stand as a member of the government in support of this bill. 11:42 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins My journey to this House was through a pathway of activism, and it was actually the pandemic that turned me into a medical activist due to the egregious breaches of work health and safety that I witnessed in hospitals in the early days of the pandemic. These were due to insufficient respiratory protection and PPE. From being an activist, I've now taken a career change, you could say, and I'm now in this House in order to drive change. So it gives me great pleasure today to speak in support of the Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022, which makes amendments to the Work Health and Safety Act. However, I'm not going to be speaking about COVID or a respiratory virus. I am going to be speaking about another respiratory condition which is affecting hundreds of thousands of Australians. It relates to engineered stone. Like millions of Australians, I chose the gleaming stone benchtop in my kitchen because it was hard-wearing and aesthetically pleasing and did not need the maintenance of marble. Many years later, it continues to withstand the pressures of a busy household where children have grown up into teenagers. What I did not know when I made this purchase was that it harbours a dirty little secret: engineered stone is killing workers in the stonemason industry, who are developing an irreversible fibrotic condition called silicosis. It has given engineered stone the moniker of being the asbestos of the 2020s. Engineered stone is a man-made composite of different materials held together by polymer resin. Unlike natural stone, engineered stone contains a far higher content of crystalline silica at over 90 per cent compared with granite, which has 30 per cent, and marble, which has just 13 per cent. The cutting process makes silica airborne. It is then inhaled by workers and even bystanders who may not be directly involved in the cutting process. One tragic case I met was that of a young mother, Sally, who had developed silicosis while working as a receptionist at a stonemasonry. She looked the picture of health from the outside—in fact, she looked glowing—but she experienced breathlessness when walking distances that should not affect a woman in her 30s. Apart from exertional breathlessness, she was weighed down by anxiety about her children's future, crushing uncertainty and mounting medical bills on a single household income. Sally was brought to my attention by a delegation from the ACTU and a colleague and friend, Dr Kate Cole, the President of the Australian Institute of Occupational Hygienists and a tireless campaigner for better worker protections, who collectively are demanding an outright ban on artificial stone. Silicosis is no joke. When lung transplantation is the only option, then every lever must be pulled to prevent this disease because lung transplantation is no joke either. I worked for 13 years at the Alfred Hospital, Australia's leading lung transplant centre. There I worked closely with the first-class lung transplant multidisciplinary team where I helped manage one of the dual threats to patients with lung transplantation—infection. The other, of course, is rejection, and it usually catches up with patients provided that infection doesn't get them first. Lung transplantation is a scarce intervention that is rationed, and, although it does not confer a normal life expectancy, it is lifesaving for those lucky few who are eligible for it. But it is no picnic. It's one of the most gruelling procedures to go through and requires a lifetime of constant medical monitoring. Wet cutting of stone is not universal. Neither is good ventilation, nor well-fitting masks, called respirators, for workers—the same ones that I used to wear on the wards. Awareness of silicosis is poor. If knowledge is power, then these workers are disempowered. Poor working conditions are rife, overseen by unscrupulous operators who force workers to dry cut the stone. Queensland was the first state to ban dry cutting of engineered stone in 2018. Victoria followed in 2019 and New South Wales in 2020. But, by then, the damage was done. Surveillance studies from 2021 in Queensland and Victoria have found that nearly one in five workers in the industry have developed silicosis, and they are in the prime of their lives—diagnosed at an average age of 41 years. Some are developing it as little as three years after exposure. It is important to note that silica is ubiquitous; it is all throughout the earth's crust. Hence, workers in mines and quarries are also at risk. I know something about airborne threats. As I said, I fought for better respiratory protection for healthcare workers when COVID hit, and we were heard. What is facing stonemasons is a pandemic of neglect. Our insatiable appetite for engineered stone has led to short cuts in working conditions in the quest to meet demand and profit. At least 600 stonemasons and workers in other trades like the tunnelling industry have been diagnosed with silicosis since 2018, of whom 175 are in Victoria. However, this is the tip of an iceberg, with Curtin University estimating that are at least 103,000 people with silicosis. It is a hidden, human tragedy. Some of these workers will be unaware of their diagnosis, but all will eventually develop symptoms—all of them. Campaigners are demanding a ban on engineered stone, more stringent work health and safety laws and better enforcement with adequate staffing of compliance work. For example, the New South Wales government reported that there were 60 inspections of manufactured stone businesses in 2022, but with at least 250 facilities there is a really long time—a big gap—between these inspections for what are high-risk sites. Given the scale of the problem, the challenges of compliance and its devastating health effects, which are much like getting a terminal diagnosis, campaigners believe that engineered stone should be banned, and so do I. We have heeded the call, and this legislation is part of our overarching agenda to improve the wellbeing of workers. The Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill implements some of the 34 recommendations from the Boland review in 2018 by Marie Boland, a former executive director of SafeWork SA. It languished under the former government, but we have dusted it off and are starting the work of implementation to make Australian workplaces safer. This bill lowers the bar for conviction of shonky operators. It includes negligence as a threshold, which means that both reckless and grossly negligent employers who expose workers to serious risks will face penalties. The bill prevents a person who is required to pay a penalty under the law from recovering that penalty under insurance. For example, a Victorian company in 2022 was fined $31,000 for failing to provide proper controls to reduce exposure to silica dust, a cost that could have been recovered from an insurance claim. We want to ensure that a serious work health and safety incident does not get reduced to the cost of doing business. A person's life, no matter the person's age but especially in the prime of their lives, is not a line item on a budget balance sheet. Prohibiting such insurance claims will help to concentrate the minds of businesses on taking their work health and safety obligations seriously. The bill also allows easier sharing of information with Safe Work Australia to maintain important datasets on traumatic injury and compensation claims, which will inform better policy made here. In 2021, 169 people lost their lives at work—169 lives too many. It is hoped that the future introduction of industrial manslaughter legislation will help to bolster the deterrent effect of this amendment. Finally, being safe at work means physical safety as well as psychological safety, and that boils down to workplace culture. A workplace with a consultative non-combative culture is also a much safer one. Workers and managers need not to be in opposition but to be figuring out solutions together. An asymmetric power dynamic means that workers are automatically at a disadvantage, which is why we have work health and safety laws in the first place. These laws mandate consultation. They also ensure that people in the hot zone who have skin in the game, much as I did when I was on the wards, are empowered to speak up on matters relating to work health and safety. Had I known then what I know now, I would have stuck with steel or wood or some other safer alternative, like natural stone. Strengthening work health and safety laws is one side of the equation, with consumer activism the other. 11:53 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I thank all members for their contributions to the debate on the Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2022. I particularly thank the member for Higgins for her comments that go to silicosis. I want to assure the member and assure the House that there are various actions that will be taken by the government this year with respect to making sure that we provide protections that should have been provided some time ago. I've called a meeting of my state counterparts to start planning the various actions that we'll take this year. The bill in front of us implements some important recommendations from the review of the model work health and safety laws conducted by Marie Boland in 2018. I welcome the opposition's support for this bill. When the shadow minister spoke, he made reference to this all being the coalition's idea and the work started under them. It is true that in 2018 they made sure that the Boland review took place. The recommendations then sat there. I'm pleased that they want to take credit for the idea—that's fine. We'll all take credit for finally acting on it because we are some years later than we needed to be on implementing the Boland review. Safe Work Australia undertook extensive consultation seeking feedback on implementing key recommendations of the Boland review. In June 2022 the model work health and safety law was revised in line with this process. This bill will bring the Commonwealth Work Health and Safety Act 2011 into line with those updates. There are two changes in particular I draw the chamber's attention to. The first area is the bill amends the fault element for the most serious work health and safety offences to include gross negligence, or negligence to the criminal standard, in addition to recklessness. The Boland review found there had been very few successful prosecutions, in part due to the difficulties associated with proving recklessness. The government is acting on genuine community concerns that employers who put their workers at risk of danger through grossly negligent conduct can escape punishment because the bar for conviction is set too high. Now, both recklessness and grossly negligent employers who expose workers to serious risk can face the most serious consequences and penalties. The second area I would highlight is prohibiting insurance for work health and safety penalties. The bill prohibits a person from taking insurance to cover repayments made on penalties imposed under work health and safety laws. Having insurance means that you effectively end up with a situation where the penalty is no longer necessarily a disincentive for the employer. The penalty is removed because it's something that's been insured against anyway. We need to make sure that the penalties that are there have an impact on behaviour. Work health and safety offences must remain serious deterrents and can't become the cost of doing business. Those who owe a work health and safety duty should not be able to insulate themselves from the consequences of breaching their duty by putting the safety of their workers and the public at risk. The government's committed to working closely with the states and territories to deliver safe workplaces for all Australians. This starts with implementing the recommendations in the Boland report. The bill takes the first step towards achieving safer and healthier workplaces in the Commonwealth jurisdiction. There's still a lot left to do. Australian workers deserve to be able to go to work and come home safely to their loved ones, and I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. ADJOURNMENT 576 ADJOURNMENT Defence Equipment 576 11:57 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy We have just concluded the expenditure of $40.2 billion to build patrol boats and drones. You, Mr Deputy Speaker Wilkie, would know that 15 machine guns are the only lethal ordinance that we got with the expenditure of that $40 billion. The head of the armed forces has reportedly issued instructions that they're not allowed to use the word 'kill'. Well that's a rather intriguing concept, that we have an army that's not allowed to use the word 'kill', and it's in keeping with the expenditure of $40.2 billion without any ability to kill the enemy. What conceivable purpose is there in having 15 patrol boats and hundreds of drones when nothing can deliver ordinance to actually confront the enemy with lethal force. This is obviously in keeping with the paradigm of the new Army under the head of the armed forces. It was directed that they do not use the word 'kill'. Apart from the wastage of $40 billion, every one of those patrol boats could have been made in such a way that they would carry 40 missiles. A patrol boat can go out probably 1,000 kilometres, and that gives you an advanced perimeter, 1,000 kilometres from Australia. That weaponry can go another 600 to 700 kilometres beyond that range. So you now have a fortress perimeter around. There is no defence of Australia without the essential services. As Admiral Blackburn in the NRMA report said, what is the point in having a tank or a truck if you've got no fuel for it? If ever there is an indictment of the people in this place, we have three per cent self sufficiency of fuel. One might say, 'Oh, but no-one would cut our fuel off. 'Well, guess what forced the Japanese into war? Guess what the European war was about? It was about Hitler trying to get to the oilfields. Stalingrad was the gateway to the oilfields, and, too bad for Adolf, he didn't make it. The Japanese had their oil embargoed by America. They had to fight or retreat into a second-rate power regime, so they decided to fight. That is the importance of oil but, to the Australian parliament, it doesn't seem to have any relevance at all. To the Australian government, it is of no importance at all. The crossbenches will be putting forward pretty simple legislation, really, to ban the export of oil like every other country does while having a reserved resource policy of 27 per cent. We were at three per cent self-sufficiency and are now at 27 per cent self-sufficient. We will own also, by law, the refineries; (2) all waste in Australia under pyrolysis would be—the same as the Germans did in the last two years of the war—converted into diesel; (3) all motor vehicles in metropolitan areas, government motor vehicles in metropolitan areas—I emphasise government and metropolitan—will be electric, made in Australia by Australian-owned companies, as will the batteries. Now we would be at 70 per cent self-sufficiency. The rest would be provided by algae, ethanol, pyrolysis. We have 320 million hectares of prickly trees in North Queensland which, at this moment, in a minor way, is being converted into valuable product. Do those things and you would be 100 per cent self-sufficient in oil. If you think, 'Oh, China wouldn't do that to us,' they did it to us the Christmas before last. Some imbecile in Canberra had said every litre of diesel had to carry AdBlue, which is a urea derivative. The only supplier was China. China decided it would be good fun, because they didn't like Mr Morrison, to cut off our diesel fuel. So the day after Christmas—choose the date—they said no more AdBlue, so every truck in Australia was going to cease to operate. What sort of a country does this? (Time expired) Albanese Government 577 12:03 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt Since being elected, the Albanese Labor government has focused on delivering the positive change Australians voted for. I know and we all know there is a lot of work to be done to ease the pressure on families and to help Australians manage their budgets. From 1 January, for the first time in its 75-year history, the maximum cost of the general scripts under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the PBS, will fall from $42.50 to $30. I am a prime example of someone who would benefit from this. I am a chronic asthmatic and have been most of my life. I was on the minimum wage for 15, 16 years. Being a chronic asthmatic, the medication was extremely expensive. I have to take about four puffs a day, so I used to cut it down to two because I couldn't afford it. Now people like me, people like my family, can now afford it thanks to the Albanese Labor government. This change fills the government's election promise to deliver cheaper medicines to ease the cost of living for Australians. The Albanese Labor government is making medicines cheaper. For the first time in its 75-year history, the maximum cost of a script on the PBS scheme has fallen. I went to a pharmacy last week in my electorate of Holt. The pharmacist said how happy he was that the scheme had come into play. He has seen more people coming to fill scripts and getting their medication, which is fantastic. Labor are cutting the cost of scripts by 29 per cent, with the maximum cost to drop by $12.50. It doesn't sound like a lot but, let me tell you, for those living on the minimum wage for a long time, $12.50 is a lot of money. That money can be put into other things in the household such as groceries. This will save someone taking medication up to $150 per year or a family using two or more medications up to $450, so that is really good. I thank the Albanese Labor government for looking after all Australians. The ABS advised that the high cost of medications meant that close to one million Australians delayed or didn't fill their medications in 2019 and 2020. Cutting the price by nearly one-third will mean more people will be able to get the medications they need to stay healthy without worrying so much about the price. This change will put close to $200 million back in the pockets of Australians each year. Approximately 19 million Australians are eligible to benefit from this change. That means that a lot of people who live in my electorate who are finding it hard will get a lot of advantage from this scheme. School leavers and people in Holt wanting to retrain and upskill and stay in the workforce are encouraged to enrol in more than 55,000 fee-free TAFE and VET places on offer in Victoria in 2023. I was a TAFE student. I went to William Angliss Institute. I remember it cost me so much money. Being a chef, I needed tools, a uniform and to cover the cost of going to TAFE. I remember working at Woolworths, doing 30 hours a week, and all that money would go into my TAFE course. This is really, really good, because people in Holt and all the young school leavers in Holt will be able to afford to do this because the government has made it possible. The fee-free places are available following the recent agreement between the Albanese Labor government and the Victorian government to address the current skills shortage. The more than $250 million agreement is expected to deliver a significant boost to the Victorian skills and training sector. This investment will support around 26,900 places in the care sector over the next 12 months, including around 3,800 early childhood education and care places. Thank you, Albanese Labor government for looking after people like me, my family and the people of Holt. Wannon Electorate: Surf Lifesaving 577 12:08 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I rise this afternoon to thank the wonderful surf lifesaving clubs in my electorate for what they have done over the summer in keeping our beaches and swimmers safe and for what they continue to do as the summer continues. My surf lifesaving clubs stretch from Anglesea in the very east of my electorate right through to Portland in the west of my electorate, and all of the surf lifesaving clubs in between do such wonderful work in keeping our community safe. I had the privilege to visit the Anglesea Surf Lifesaving Club and hear firsthand about the recent experience they had in saving swimmers who had wandered into a rip at Anglesea Beach. The actions of both the young and older members of the surf lifesaving club at Anglesea saved those lives that day. I would like to thank them, as I am sure the family who they saved on that day would like to thank them, for their quick action in addressing what could have been a situation which led to people dying. I'd also like to thank the Lorne Surf Life Saving Club just down the road for putting on such a wonderful Pier to Pub event. This ocean swim of 1.2 kilometres is the biggest ocean swim in the Southern Hemisphere. COVID has meant that it hasn't taken place over the last couple of summers, but it was back bigger and better than ever. It was the first ocean swim that I've ever done, and I must say I thoroughly, thoroughly enjoyed it and I didn't drown, which was wonderful. But the way it's organised and the atmosphere and to see everyone and the way that they participate are just absolutely fantastic. I give a shout-out to my son, because we had a bet to see who could swim the fastest. He got me—only by a few seconds, but he got me. But I'm going to come back after him next year. There's also a wonderful, wonderful swim event which is called the Shipwreck Coast Swim Series, which is put on by Portland, Port Fairy, Warrnambool and Port Campbell surf lifesaving clubs. Although I couldn't do all four of the swims, I was able to do the Warrnambool swim. It's called the Tony Ryan Classic. It was another wonderful event: the way that it was organised, the community spirit of the event and the way everyone came together at the end to share a barbecued sausage put on by the local service club. It was just the community at its best, and I know the other three swims that were put on by the other surf lifesaving clubs were equally good. We should never, ever forget what our surf lifesavers do for our community, because they put their lives at risk to help protect us and keep us safe, and we know that that can end tragically. We saw that, very sadly, occur at Port Campbell a few years ago. So to all those surf lifesavers, who to this day continue to serve our local communities, can I say on behalf of all our communities in the wonderful electorate of Wannon, but also on behalf of Australia and all those overseas visitors who come and visit our wonderful beaches right across the Wannon coastline: thank you for what you do. You keep our local communities safe, you keep all our visitors safe both from across Australia and internationally, and you make sure that people like me can also have an event to target to make sure that we stay fit over summer and that we haven't indulged too much on Christmas Day. To our surf lifesavers: a very, very big thank you. Aged Care 578 12:13 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur It really is no secret that the aged-care system has been in crisis for well over a decade. I applaud the measures taken by the Albanese government and the Minister for Aged Care to try and remediate this problem, but more must be done to help those most affected by the sector's failings, and that's our aged-care workers. The reasons for the problems in aged care are complex and, to be honest, no single government is to blame. There has been an evolution in aged care over the last decades so that the people who are now placed in residential aged care are sicker and older and have more complex disorders than previously. We live in a society that is fairly rapidly aging. None of us really want to end up in residential aged care, but, unfortunately, it's true that about 25 to 30 per cent of us will end up in residential aged care. These days, we are better at keeping people at home, but we still have a cohort of frail aged who will require residential care. The time spent in residential aged care, in fact, is now much shorter than it was 10, 15 or 20 years ago. As I've said, residents tend to have much more complex disorders. A large percentage have mobility disorders; many have feeding and eating disorders; many have neurological disorders; and many have various other combinations of complaints such as hearing loss, blindness, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease and orthopaedic problems, which means their care is much more time consuming and much more complex. I've visited every aged-care facility in my electorate, and I am confident that the care that people get in the aged-care centres in my electorate is the best that can be provided. I have confidence in my aged-care workforce. However, that is a workforce that is predominantly female, and it is ageing. And now there is an extremely high turnover—up to 80 per cent per annum—in our aged-care workforce because the pay and conditions are so poor. There are really complex reasons for that, but the pay of aged-care workers is now, even with some recent pay rises, amongst the lowest in our community. People stay working in aged care for much shorter periods of time, and they move on to higher paying jobs. I had the honour recently to meet with HSU members from my electorate of Macarthur and the surrounding areas to discuss their concerns. I'm very proud of the work they do. They were wonderful women. They work extremely hard under very stressful conditions, all while caring for vulnerable and sick people with a whole variety of complex disorders. I marvel at their work, and I believe that the aged-care system is dependent upon their sacrifices. Praise can only provide so much, however, and without strong and meaningful policies to improve pay and conditions I fear we'll see a mass shortage of aged-care workers evolving in the next 12 to 18 months. In fact, 75 per cent of workers have indicated they are considering leaving the workforce altogether to do other things if they do not receive a significant pay increase. That pay increase should include all aged-care workers—not just the care providers but also the kitchen workers, the cleaners and the social support workers. All those working in aged care need and deserve a pay increase, and I can't blame them for wanting that as soon as possible. We have a problem with rapidly increasing cost-of-living pressures. I fully support the Health Services Union in pushing for greater worker benefits and sector supports, and I am proud to support them in their campaign. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety noted that a wages gap exists between aged-care workers and workers performing equivalent functions in the acute health system, and that's certainly true. I fully support our aged-care workers in their push for better wages and conditions, and I will do anything to make that possible for them. Hume Electorate: Australia Day Awards 579 12:18 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I rise to congratulate a number of outstanding locals living right across my electorate of Hume. In the recent Australia Day honours, each one was recognised by their local council for the enormous contributions they made to our communities. In Camden, Kylee Bentham was named Citizen of the Year for her ongoing commitment to volunteer work, Air Force cadet Ebony-Rose Mangion was named Young Citizen of the Year for her service to the 303 Camden Squadron, Melissa Musgrave won the Arts and Culture Award, Group 6 Rugby League Referees won the Sports Achievement Award, and Camden Community Garden and Macarthur Storm Chasers were joint winners of the Community Group Award. In the Wollondilly shire, there were joint winners for the Wollondilly Citizen of the Year, Peter Fenning and Mark Scambary. Peter has volunteered with the Buxton RFS for the past 40 years, an RFS that saw tragedy during the bushfires several years ago, and Mark served as a police officer in the region for nearly three decades, with a particular focus on helping disadvantaged young people. Wollondilly Community Men's Shed won the Disability Inclusion Award. The Local Hero, Community Group award went to the Bargo Book Group, and Patrick Nellestein was named the Local Hero, Individual. Libby Berg won the Achiever of the Year, Inga Schwaiger is the Environmental Citizen of the Year, and Josh Azzopardi was named the Young Citizen of the Year. Hilltops Council named some outstanding Boorowa locals as recipients of awards for 2023. Boorowa's citizen of the year was Brendon Shean. The Len & Joan Oxley Memorial Award went to my good friend Judy McGuiness. Belinda Kelly and Danny Flanery won Boorowa Community Landcare Awards. Tom Simson won Senior Sportsperson of the Year. Junior sportspeople of the year were Isabella Piper for the under-18 category and Toby Corkhill for the under-12 category. The Boorowa Roverettes League Tag Team were named Sporting Team of the Year, and Murray Armour was the Clubperson of the Year. Community Awards were given to Gail Grimson, Belinda Hewitt, Tracey Potts, Sue-Anne Corcoran and Margaret Carmody. In the Upper Lachlan region, there were a number of citizens of the year: Nic Foster, Leona Evans, Terry Lovelock and John Sullivan. The young citizens of the year were Bowen Murray, Ari Stephenson and Jessica Sharman. Sportsperson of the Year was Rona Treloggan. The young sportspeople of the year were Lillian Skelly, Bella Croker and Brea Waters, and the Mayoral Award for Outstanding Efforts was awarded, deservedly, to Macie Wilson. Finally, in Goulburn Mulwaree, Citizen of the Year went to Jason Broadbent for his wonderful contribution to the Southern Tablelands Football Association, an incredibly robust club in that region. His contribution to soccer more broadly, of course, was part of that. Youth Citizen of the Year went to Tom Skeffington for his outstanding commitment and involvement within the school community. I've personally seen that. The Community Event of the Year was Convoy for Kids Goulburn's Convoy Day, a fantastic local event supporting kids in the Goulburn community. Junior Sportsperson of the Year, highly commended, went to Costa Toparis, who is getting outstanding results at the young age of 15 in karting and formula racing motorsports. He's over with a major team in the UK right now—he's recently joined Carlin. Junior Sportsperson of the Year, highly commended, also went to Elsie Apps in recognition of her becoming the Australian champion in the national road titles for cycling. I ride regularly with Elsie, and I've got to tell you she is absolutely extraordinary. She was a gold medallist in the New South Wales state championships. Junior Sportsperson Josh Kalozi broke the 110-metre hurdles record and won a gold medal at the Oceania championships. And Senior Sportsperson of the Year went to Ellen Ryan, who, of course, won two gold medals at the Commonwealth Games. We have an absolutely extraordinary region with extraordinary people making amazing contributions. Congratulations to each and every one of you. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice 580 12:23 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby Reconciliation Park in Eden Hills in Boothby is the site of the former Colebrook children's home. From 1944 to 1972, Aboriginal children from across South Australia were sent to Colebrook house to be raised by the United Aboriginal Mission after being removed from their families and communities. The house itself is now long gone, and, thanks to the work of Colebrook Tjitji Tjuta, Blackwood Reconciliation Group and the Aboriginal Lands Trust, this park is now a site of reconciliation and healing, with a series of very moving statues reflecting on the experiences of the children who were sent there, their mothers, their families and their communities. My background is in public health, and one of the really important principles of public health is, 'Nothing about me without me.' This principle has been used across health programs that aim to address unequal health and social outcomes for women, men, older people and those of specific cultural backgrounds. Ultimately, while as a non-clinical public health practitioner I can design a program along best-practice, evidence based health principles, unless it actually works for the people it's designed for, it fails. At its worst, it may do real harm, as we now understand the child removals did to both those removed and those left behind. For me, this is the basic principle behind the concept of the First Nations Voice to Parliament, which will be proposed in a referendum expected later this year. In 1967, the Australian people voted to give the Commonwealth government the ability to make laws impacting Indigenous Australians. Now, over 50 years later, the Voice is designed to give those First Nations Australians the opportunity to have input into the laws and programs as they affect them. By establishing a voice in the Constitution, it will ensure that this principle is not subject to the whim of current or future governments. The recent Closing the Gap report, which reports on a number of health and social outcomes where First Nations people have significantly poorer outcomes than the general Australian community, continues to have very mixed results despite years of funding and best intentions. After 15 years of Closing the Gap initiatives, life expectancy for First Nations people is close to a decade less than the rest of the community. We're all experts in our own lives and experiences, and the Voice will provide input into how taxpayer dollars are best utilised to have the outcomes that will make the difference for the communities that will be impacted. The Voice will not be a decision-making body. It will not have the power to veto anything or to enforce anything. It won't be delivering programs. It will, however, ensure that, when making decisions that impact First Nations Australians, current and future governments will have the best possible opportunity to receive the advice and the input they need from those who will be directly impacted. Nothing about me, without me. We're holding a Voice event in Boothby at the beautiful Belair National Park on Gums Oval No. 1, from 11.00 am till 1.00 pm on Sunday 26 February. RSVPs are on my website. South Australian Attorney-General and Minister for Indigenous Affairs, Kyam Maher, and the member for Waite, Catherine Hutchesson, will be there. I invite all of my Boothby residents to come along. Please let us know if you're coming, and let's have the conversation. Question agreed to. Federation Chamber adjourned at 12:27