2023-03-23 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 23 March 2023

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

COMMITTEES 1 COMMITTEES Law Enforcement Joint Committee 1 Report 1 09:01 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter On behalf of the Joint Committee on Law Enforcement, I present the following reports: Examination of the Australian Federal Police annual report 2020-21 and 2021-22 and Examination of the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission annual report 2020-21 and 2021-22. Reports made parliamentary papers in accordance with standing order 39(e). Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity Joint Committee 1 Report 1 09:02 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon () (): On behalf of the Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, I present the committee's report entitled Examination of the annual report of the Integrity Commissioner 2021-22. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr PEARCE 282306 by leave—I rise today, as the Deputy Chair of the Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, to speak on the annual report of the Integrity Commissioner for 2021-22. Under the Law Enforcement Integrity Commissioner Act 2006, the Joint Committee on the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity has a statutory role to examine each annual report prepared by the Integrity Commissioner. The committee held a public hearing on 8 February 2023 in order to examine the report and to speak with ACLEI about its performance over the reporting period, which was 1 July 2021 to 30 June 2022. The committee heard that ACLEI performed well against its performance framework in 2021-22, achieving most of its performance targets. The areas requiring work were: improving time lines and assessing work in investigations. These areas have come into sharp focus with the preparation for ACLEI to become part of the newly formed National Anti-Corruption Commission, NACC, in mid-2023. The Integrity Commissioner told the committee that ACLEI had three key priorities for the remainder of its time: firstly, to complete the legislative requirements for ACLEI; secondly, to finish ACLEI well, meaning ACLEI is in a fortunate position of knowing it is coming to an end, and it will take the opportunities over the next two months to celebrate all that that committee has achieved; and, finally, to work with the Attorney-General's Department on the establishment of the NACC. In relation to the areas for improvement, the committee was pleased to hear about the effort in order to reduce the backlog of investigative reports, but the committee notes in its report that this effort will need to be sustained given the number of matters that may be referred. The committee heard that recruitment was a major focus for the reporting period. While investigative teams have grown, recruiting specialised skills such as those of investigators and intelligence analysts in this already small market with a tight labour market will be a significant challenge for the NACC. The committee noted various strategies that had been put in place, such as broadening the pool of ACLEI's officers over time beyond a law enforcement background, and opening offices outside of Canberra. Noting the upcoming establishment of the NACC, the committee was pleased to see that ACLEI is now sharing information with a broader remit beyond agencies in its jurisdiction. For example, ACLEI has published its second annual Corruption vulnerabilities brief, and the Integrity Maturity Framework has now been developed. The committee noted the importance of this work, as agencies will come under NACC's jurisdiction with differing levels of maturity in relation to their integrity framework. The committee thanked the Integrity Commissioner and the staff for their work over the reporting period. BILLS 1 BILLS Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 1

Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading 1 09:06 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean I rise today to join with many others in speaking in favour of the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022. This bill amends the Ministers of State Act 1952 to provide for greater transparency and accountability at the Commonwealth level of Australia's system of government by ensuring that the Australian people are able to access information in relation to the composition of the federal Executive Council, those who have been appointed to administer departments of state and the offices that ministers of state hold. It's difficult to believe that this was truly necessary. To me, as a long-term Canberran, this is still one of the most extraordinary parts of the record of the previous government. The introduction of this legislation is reactive. It's being introduced because the member for Cook went behind the backs of his closest cabinet colleagues and was appointed to administer multiple portfolios during 2020 and 2021—the departments of health; finance; industry, science, energy and resources; Treasury; and home affairs—in addition to his appointment to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. We now know, from revelations in the last couple of weeks, that there were further secret appointments. Such a lack of transparency is indicative of a lack of respect for the institutions of government, a lack of confidence in ministerial government and, in terms of the general public, a particular lack of respect for a public that has a right to know who is running their government and who administers particular portfolios. The Albanese Labor government was elected with a mandate to restore public trust in the institutions of government and in government itself. The cornerstone of this is the establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. That legislation was passed in the parliament late last year. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 follows the same core principles that underpin the establishment of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. When this power grab was discovered, it was once again up to Labor to clean up another mess from the former government. I will take this opportunity to remind the House how this government responded. On 26 August last year, the Prime Minister and Attorney-General announced the establishment of an inquiry into the appointment of the former Prime Minister to administer multiple departments. That inquiry was led by the former High Court Justice Hon. Virginia Bell KC, with a final report being provided to the government on 25 November last year. Those opposite labelled it a political witch-hunt. What a shock! Well, we found a witch. This inquiry was not about politics. It was about working out how the former Prime Minister was able to be sworn into five key portfolios, without having to notify the Australian public or even his own cabinet. Our parliamentary democracy relies on basic government transparency as a critical means to provide checks and balances. As the Solicitor-General made clear: … 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. Throughout the whole of the previous parliament, I well recall the number of questions which were put to the Prime Minister but were then referred off to ministers despite the fact that, we now know, he actually had the capacity to respond directly to those questions himself, because he had that ministerial responsibility provided to him in secret. 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. The measures in the bill will restore integrity and transparency to the process of appointing elected officials to high office and ensure we have a system of government where there are checks and balances. Never again will one person be able to garner powers without adequate and warranted accountability to the Australian people and the Australian parliament. I will always advocate for and encourage greater accountability in government. I represent a large population of current and former public servants who have strict guidelines that they have to follow, and they expect their ministers to do the same. The member for Cook's inability to hold himself to the highest level of accountability, which his former office expected of him, is deeply concerning. When speaking with journalist Niki Savva, the former member for Kooyong said: … I don't think there was any reason for Scott to take on the additional Treasury portfolio. The fact he did take it, and it was not made transparent to me and others, was wrong and profoundly disappointing. It was extreme overreach. When his then deputy declares it as 'extreme overreach', what does it say about the judgement and motives of the former Prime Minister? The Albanese government is about transparency. The introduction of this bill shows that this government is delivering on its promise to restore trust and integrity to federal politics. The measures in this bill will go some way to provide greater integrity and transparency around the process of appointing elected officials to high office and especially to ensure we have a system of government where one person cannot again, as I said earlier, garner powers without adequate and warranted accountability to the Australian people and the parliament. The legislation 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 in 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 such a notification on the revocation of any of these positions. The notifiable instrument will include the name of the person; the department of state, where appropriate; and the date on which they were sworn, appointed or directed. In the case of revocation, the notifiable instrument is to include the name of the person, the name of the former office, and the date that such membership, appointment or direction was revoked. Those opposite wouldn't know what accountability or integrity was, and the Australian people shared that view last May. That's why this government has continued to roll out multiple pieces of legislation to restore integrity and transparency in the federal government. That's why the Albanese government introduced long-overdue reforms to the Public Interest Disclosure Act, which will put Australia on the path to a best-practice whistleblowing framework for the public sector. In my working life before coming here, I represented public sector workers across a whole range of Commonwealth agencies. I've had the great privilege of working with people with great integrity, who at times have needed to shine a light on public sector maladministration or corruption. The need for greater whistleblower protection and the ongoing need for integrity reform is clear to me, and it's a privilege to speak on this bill as part of the greater moves to address these issues. There is still work to be done, but already the reforms in the first year of the Albanese government have led to an improvement in our global corruption perceptions ranking, as the latest Transparency International data shows. The Albanese government's work in restoring accountability does not stop with greater whistleblower protection or with the reforms in this bill. The passing of our National Anti-Corruption Commission legislation last year was a great step in increasing government transparency and integrity. I'd like to take this opportunity to remind those opposite what the National Anti-Corruption Commission looks like. The commission will operate independently of government, with a full suite of powers similar to those of a royal commission. It will have discretion to commence inquiries into serious or systemic corruption on its own initiative or in response to referrals, including from whistleblowers, who will have strong protections, and there will be exemptions for journalists to protect the identity of sources. It will have the discretion to undertake investigations, of both criminal and non-criminal conduct, and to refer matters to another agency or to take no action. It will be able to refer findings that could constitute criminal conduct to the Australian Federal Police or the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. It will have the power to investigate allegations of serious or systemic corruption that occurred before or after its establishment. After what we've seen over recent years, and the diminishing public trust in government as a consequence, this is extremely important. We are establishing a National Anti-Corruption Commission with real power and authority. Importantly, our approach consistently meets the path of cooperation and collaboration so that all Australians are heard. The establishment of a National Anti-Corruption Commission begins the important work of restoring the faith of the Australian people in their parliament and government. The Albanese government will continue to lead on matters of national integrity and transparency. This government understands that everyday Australians are losing trust in their political system and that we need a comprehensive approach that will go further than maintaining the status quo but ensures the federal government operates with the highest levels of integrity and transparency. This is not some sort of victory for the government. It's effectively a key to ensure that Australians can have faith and trust in any of their governments. I thank the Prime Minister and the Attorney-General for the hard work they have done in this space in restoring confidence and trust to government in relation to the NACC, enhanced whistleblower protections and now with this legislation to ensure that the Australian people are notified when there has been a change in ministerial arrangements. I would encourage all members in this place to support this bill to take one further step to restore public confidence in government. As I said earlier, as a Canberran it baffles me that this bill was ever necessary. If there's one part of the day that nearly all Australians are familiar with, and often judge this place on, it is question time. That is the most visible part of the day, and it is a part of the day when there is an expectation that ministers who have responsibility for portfolios will respond to questions that come from electorates all around the country, whether they be represented by the opposition or by the government. It's still extraordinary to me that, for a significant period of time, without any explanation, the Australian people were hoodwinked. Effectively, when questions were asked of the Prime Minister, where the Prime Minister had assumed responsibility for a number of portfolios, those questions were not answered. That responsibility was not acknowledged. It was, certainly, an extraordinary act of bad faith for members of the government of the day, an extraordinary lack of both trust and confidence in their capacity to do the jobs for which they were appointed. It was an extraordinary breach of faith and confidence with the Australian people, something that we should ensure never happens again in this place. When Australians all around the country are watching or listening to question time or to other parts of the day when legislation is introduced, they should have a firm understanding of who is responsible and who is accountable for the work that goes on in this place. 09:20 Ms TEMPLEM 181810 Macquarie AN () (): I commend the words of the member for Bean because it is quite extraordinary, and still hard to fathom, that for a very long period of time we sat on those opposition benches questioning the government and the Prime Minister—the then prime minister, the member for Cook. He knew things that he was not disclosing to the parliament. He knew things his own ministers didn't know. The very premise of this parliament, the premise that this is a place where governments can be held to account, particularly, as the member for Bean indicates, during question time, was really treated with contempt. That is the core of this legislation, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, and the efforts that we are making to ensure that cannot happen again, that this parliament cannot be treated like fools and can't be held in contempt because of a prime minister failing to disclose actions and decisions that he's made. He failed to disclose that he was, in fact, the minister for many, many things, not just his prime ministerial role. That is the core of this piece of legislation and why it is so important to have on the record the processes that have led to this point. This bill is about restoring the Australian people's confidence in our federal system of government and part of rebuilding the integrity in public sector institutions, in the processes that we have and in the officials. It's also a key to ensuring that there is a capacity to hold a government and a prime minister to account. The bill will implement reforms to provide for greater transparency and accountability in the administration of this parliament, in the ministries and in the Commonwealth. It implements the first of the six recommendations from the Bell inquiry, so it isn't the only thing that we will be doing. It follows the steps that we've taken already so that we finally have, in this country, a National Anti-Corruption Commission. This is as important as that National Anti-Corruption Commission legislation. I want to walk through how we got to this point because this is historic—we have never been at this point before—and why it was so important that we censured the member for Cook on this matter. The Prime Minister has spoken about this issue, and I thank him for his leadership. But we should all be deeply saddened that a censure of a former prime minister was necessary. It is a real shame for all of us that this institution had to take that step because, had we not taken that step, we would have been saying: 'That's okay. Maybe it wasn't the best thing to do,' but we'd shrug our shoulders and he'd get away with it. It isn't something that can be overlooked. It is too dangerous a precedent to be setting by overlooking that sort of behaviour. That's why we are committed to addressing the loopholes that allowed that abuse of power to occur. I think the Australian people are absolutely entitled to know who is appointed to administer departments of this country because they make such profound decisions that have impacts on everybody's lives. I hope the Australian people recognise that that is the basis of our desire and determination to clean up this system so that what happened can't be repeated. Let's just remind ourselves what actually happened, and we learnt some of this because of the Solicitor-General's advice. The advice from the Solicitor General was published in August last year, and that advice found that between March 2020 and May 2021 the member Cook was appointed by the Governor-General to administer five departments of state: Health; Finance; Industry, Science, Energy and Resources; Treasury and Home Affairs. This wasn't made public. It was only revealed through reports in the media. As a former journalist I have great regard for the role the media plays in revealing things, but, seriously, this is not something that should have been left to media to find out. It is something that should have been disclosed freely to the parliament. The Solicitor-General found that the principles of responsible government were fundamentally undermined by the actions of the former government. He went on to say: … 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. That's just a fundamental principle. We learnt more through the Bell report. The Bell report, for me, was really, really key to understanding and allowing me to get to the real core and gravity of this. The Bell report found that the appointments were unnecessary. If either the then Minister for Health and Aged Care or the then Minister for Finance had become incapacitated and it was desired to have a senior minister exercise the health minister's expansive human biosecurity emergency powers or the finance minister's significant financial authorities, the member for Cook could have been: … authorised to act as Minister for Health or Minister for Finance in a matter of minutes. It could have happened in a matter of minutes, so the excuse that we were in a pandemic and things were difficult was just a fallacy. Here we have the recognition that, had someone become incapacitated—another minister—that could have been resolved in a matter of minutes. The other appointments, including to Treasury and Home Affairs, the Bell report found are in a different category to the Health and Finance appointments. The Bell report said these appointments had 'little if any connection to the pandemic'. It went on to say: Rather, Mr Morrison was appointed to administer these departments to give himself the capacity to exercise particular statutory powers. We learnt all this thanks to the Bell report, and I commend the work of the Hon. Virginia Bell AC who did this work. She noted that the member for Cook also instructed the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to prepare a brief for his appointment to administer the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment. Apparently, he decided not to proceed with that appointment. The scale of it is staggering. When asked to explain this, the Bell report noted it is difficult to reconcile the member for Cook's choice not to inform his ministers of the appointments 'out of his wish not to be thought to be second-guessing them, with his belief that the appointments had been notified in the Commonwealth Gazette'. We've got two opposing thoughts here: 'I didn't want to alarm them and think they didn't have my confidence,' but 'Oh, I thought they were going to be noted in the Gazette and gazetted.' That sort of language has given no-one any confidence that there was a desire for transparency and disclosure. If people haven't read the Bell report, I would encourage them to do so because it makes very clear what processes were involved and why we should be so concerned about what happened and why there is a need for this legislation. One of the concluding statements in the Bell report is: Given that the Parliament was not informed of any of the appointments, it was unable to hold Mr Morrison— The member for Cook— to account in his capacity as minister administering any of these five departments. It reflects on the Solicitor-General's advice and conclusion, which was: … the principles of responsible government were "fundamentally undermined" because Mr Morrison was not "responsible" to the Parliament, and through the Parliament to the electors … That's really what this is about. It's not about us and the parliament; it is about the responsibility we have to the people who have put us here, and that is to be transparent, to disclose things and to ensure that we are meeting their expectations around integrity. It was surprising to know that there was an additional part to this story that was only very recently revealed. That was when we discovered that the member for Cook's secret appointments extended beyond himself. Documents released under freedom of information revealed that the approach of the previous coalition government, when it came to giving the Prime Minister, himself, additional portfolios, extended to other ministers, and multiple assistant ministers were appointed to multiple departments. The former member for Tangney was appointed to administer the home affairs department, and the member for Capricornia was appointed to administer the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. While these appointments were gazetted, the member for Cook specifically asked that there be no swearing-in ceremony, no public event held to show what was happening, no changes to the official ministry lists. That is a total breakdown in the trust upon which our democracy depends. It probably is best reflected on by a member of that previous government, the member for McPherson, the former Minister for Home Affairs, who was responsible for portfolios that then had appointments made to other ministers. She said: Given what we've heard, it's not surprising that I wasn't told about it. It's not okay to behave in the way the former Prime Minister and others have in relation to keeping information secret. She went on to say: At no time in those discussions did Ben Morton— The member for Tangney— raise with me the fact he had been appointed to administer that and been effectively appointed to administer parts of the home affairs department. She said: 'It's extraordinary. It's very disappointing, if this information is coming to light now.' She goes on to say, 'Who knows what the reasoning was behind any of that. There was no reason to keep that hidden.' They are the words, direct quotes, from the member for McPherson, who, like all of us, has been treated like a fool by the former Prime Minister, the now member for Cook. It is a shameful page in the history of that government. There were multiple things for that government to be ashamed of, but this one, in particular, went to the core of what this place is about. It went to the heart of what we are here to do. This legislation will go a long way to ensuring we don't see a repeat of it. The bill requires the Official Secretary to the Governor-General to publish a notifiable instrument registered on the Federal Register of Legislation as soon as reasonably practicable—not months later or only when FOI documents are revealed or only when someone tells it to a journalist for a book that's going to be published. It will say 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 any notification when those positions change. The notifiable instrument will include the name of the person, the department of state, where that's appropriate, and the date on which they were sworn, appointed or directed. Where an appointment has been revoked, it will include the name of the person, the name of the former office and the date that such membership, appointment or direction was revoked. The notifiable instrument may also comprise a copy of an instrument issued by the Governor-General, ensuring there are no loopholes and no ways to get around it; there is no way of sneakily putting it through. This bill delivers on the Albanese Labor government's promise to restore trust and integrity to federal politics. The centrepiece of this promise has been our legislation for a powerful, transparent and independent National Anti-Corruption Commission, and the provisions in this bill add to that. They go some way to ensuring greater integrity and transparency, and we will continue to look for ways to make sure the people of Australia know that we are accountable and that governments are held to account. 09:35 Ms ROBERTS 157125 Pearce I rise to speak in support of the Ministers of State Amendment Bill. Integrity and accountability should be central to everything we do, both inside and outside this parliament. These qualities should be a constant, especially for parliamentarians like ourselves, not only because we should set and uphold those standards but because Australians demand and deserve their representatives to do so—to be honest and display integrity in every decision, every interaction and every behaviour. Our democracy demands those qualities and our democracy is worth protecting. Governments should operate in the nation's interests, governing for the people who elect us to represent them. This is how I serve my community of the electorate of Pearce. The community's interests and needs are first and foremost in my mind, as is operating with the highest level of integrity in advocating for all my constituents. I listen to my community, and what they tell me is that integrity is vitally important to them. That is why the response to the Albanese government's decision to establish the National Anti-Corruption Commission has been so positive. The National Anti-Corruption Commission has been warmly welcomed by the people of Pearce, and rightly so. Australians want and deserve accountability and integrity, and they will get that through the important work and oversight of the National Anti-Corruption Commission. Members of our community have been rightly horrified by some of the actions taken by the former government. One example was when they learnt that, between March 2020 and May 2021, the former Prime Minister and member for Cook was appointed by the Governor-General to administer five portfolios, in addition to his appointment to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The former Prime Minister had quietly helped himself to a few extra portfolio responsibilities. He'd kept his colleagues and the public out of the loop and created a secret stash of ministries on top of what he already had. This was nothing less than an extraordinary scenario. It left many people astonished when the news broke and the secret was revealed. In addition, just last week we discovered, through freedom of information requests, that the member for Cook's secret appointments extended beyond himself. Documents have revealed the assiduous approach of the previous coalition government in appointing ministers. Multiple assistant ministers were appointed to multiple departments. For example, the former member for Tangney was also appointed to administer the Department of Home Affairs and the member for Capricornia was also appointed to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. While these appointments were gazetted, the member for Cook specifically requested that there be no swearing in ceremonies—no public events to show what he was doing—and no changes to the official ministry lists. It is unfortunate that over the past decade the people's trust in politicians and politics has been eroded. We must change that. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill will go a long way to restoring that trust. It is important for my electorate of Pearce that I speak on this bill. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill provides for greater transparency and accountability in Commonwealth administration, something Australians want and deserve. This bill will ensure that Australians are able to access information about the composition of the federal Executive Council. It will ensure Australians know who is appointed to administer certain departments of state and the high offices that ministers hold. It will prevent a situation ever again occurring whereby a Prime Minister can appoint himself or herself to ministries in secret, just as the former Prime Minister the member for Cook did. The former Prime Minister did so while his Liberal and National Party colleagues were blissfully unaware. It was a long list of roles, in the departments of health, finance, industry, science, energy and resources, Treasury and home affairs. Bear in mind that this was in addition to his appointment to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. In contrast we, the Albanese Labor government, are doing things differently, to have a positive impact on our nation, to make the lives of Australians better every day and in every way we possibly can. We are here for the Australian people, caring for and supporting families, businesses and organisations. We are creating a legacy of positive changes for our communities and our electorates. This is what drives us. I'm so honoured to be a part of this positive and lasting change. We are easing cost-of-living pressures by providing many positive changes that help families, including cheaper child care, because early childhood education is vitally important for life outcomes, and cheaper medicines, because we want to make sure people don't forgo the medication that they need because they can't afford it. For the first time in 75 years, the maximum cost of medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme has fallen. We made that happen. We are investing in social and affordable housing to tackle housing pressures. We are investing $10 billion to establish the Housing Australia Future Fund. Returns from the fund will be used to build 30,000 new social and affordable dwellings over five years. On wages, we are getting them moving again— (Quorum formed) I will continue. On wages, we are getting them moving again, supporting and standing up for lowest-paid workers as inflation bites. One of the Albanese government's first actions was to support wage increases for Australia's lowest-paid workers, to ensure their real wages do not go backwards. The Fair Work Commission delivered a minimum pay rise of $40 per week for full-time workers, benefiting around 2.7 million workers. We are supporting gender equality under workforce participation, which is great for our economy. We are supporting families and working parents by expanding paid parental leave, which has passed the Senate. This expansion is the biggest reform to the scheme since it was introduced. Expanding paid parental leave will enhance economic security, improve gender equality and increase participation and productivity. Importantly, it will support parents to spend more time with their children and share caring responsibilities more equally. These are some of the robust policies the Albanese government is driving for Australians. Going back: when the government referred the former Prime Minister's secret appointments to the Solicitor-General, Dr Stephen Donaghue KC, Dr Donaghue advised that the principles of responsible government were 'fundamentally undermined' by the actions of the former government, and that: … 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. In August 2022 our current Prime Minister and the Attorney-General announced the establishment of the Inquiry into the Appointment of the Former Prime Minister to Administer Multiple Departments. This was led by former High Court justice the Hon. Virginia Bell AC. The final report by former High Court justice Bell was provided to the government in November last year. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill forms part of the government's response to the Bell inquiry. The bill will amend the Ministers of State Act 1952 to provide for greater transparency and accountability at the Commonwealth level of Australia's system of government. In simple terms, it will achieve that by ensuring the Australian people are able to access information about who is doing what in government—simple, but absolutely necessary. The Bell inquiry was truly an extraordinary moment in time for Australian politics. The fact that a former High Court justice was required to investigate a former Prime Minister for swearing himself into multiple secret portfolios, and the fact that the former Prime Minister did so without notifying his colleagues—there can be no better, or should I say worse, example of a reason to need this bill than this secret-portfolio affair. Although, the shocking and damaging robodebt was also a dreadful and low moment in Australian politics that left the public reeling. And what about sports rorts? That was another funding disgrace by the previous government. There is good reason to establish an anticorruption body, as the Labor government is delivering. Democracy can be severely damaged by a lack of transparency. Politics and this place must be open, fair, decisive, responsible and caring, and above all else it must be accountable. We must—I repeat, we must—ensure transparency in our government processes. Our system of parliamentary democracy relies upon conventions and the Westminster traditions of checks and balances. The Albanese Labor government has accepted all the recommendations of the Bell inquiry into the former Prime Minister's sneaky, secret, squirrel ministries. Our progress on this matter shows the Albanese Labor government is delivering on its promise to restore trust and integrity to federal politics. At the heart of that is the establishment of the powerful, transparent and independent National Anti-Corruption Commission. The measures in the Ministers of State Amendment Bill will ensure integrity and transparency in the process of appointing elected officials to high office. Never again will one person be able to garner powers without adequate and warranted accountability to the Australian people and the Australian parliament. The actions of the former Prime Minister the member for Cook have been strongly condemned not just by the Australian public but by multiple former Liberal prime ministers too. The former Prime Minister appointed himself the Minister for Finance but did not even tell his own finance minister, an extraordinary move. The former Prime Minister had zero respect for the then finance minister to not even have mentioned his bizarre appointment. Every member of this place, including those opposite, should care about the integrity of our parliamentary process and the people who we are privileged to represent. We should be able to leave here with our heads held high, knowing that we served to the best of our ability with integrity, honesty and transparency and with heart. The Australian people deserve nothing less, and I commend this bill to the House. 09:50 Mrs ELLIOT DZW Richmond I too rise to speak on the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022. I must say that, like so many other speakers on this side, I contribute to this debate still completely outraged about the actions of the member for Cook. It is quite overwhelming—and that's certainly what people in my electorate constantly tell me—with the size and scale of what happened here. The member for Cook actually took it upon himself to act in this manner and appoint himself to so many portfolios. So I think our outrage and concern is certainly more than warranted, and we hear that in the community all the time. People just find it amazing that this even happened. Never would I have ever believed that here in modern Australia a prime minister would actively seek to damage and distort our democratic processes, parliamentary conventions and Westminster checks and balances. It does seem completely remarkable that somebody would do that in such a way when we need to ensure there is faith in all of these institutions. The previous Prime Minister the member for Cook certainly undermined all of those through these actions. Never would I have thought that it would actually be necessary for there to be specific legislation to ensure that ministers can't be secret ministers. I think we all share that. We never thought we would be here having to speak on legislation like this, yet here we are, having to do this. Let's just have a look at some of the actions of the member for Cook. Between March 2020 and May 2021, we know the former Prime Minister appointed himself to administer five portfolios in addition to his duties as Prime Minister. Last year out we found out that the member for Cook had appointed himself, firstly, as the Minister for Health on 14 March 2020; as the Minister for Finance on 30 March 2020; as the Minister for Industry, Science, Energy and Resources on 15 April 2021; as the Minister for Home Affairs on 6 May 2021; and as the Treasurer on 6 May 2021—completely remarkable. When I say that when we found out we were all shocked, it wasn't just us on the side of the House. The general public everywhere were completely shocked, and we know that MPs who were members of the former Morrison government were equally shocked. Indeed, four members of the cabinet were very shocked as well and had no knowledge of it. I think when that news broke it was a bit overwhelming, and it still is. I think the reason people were outraged is that it was so devious and undermining to do that and to keep it all a secret. What is really ironic about the actions of the member for Cook is that he was so eager to have these multiple portfolios of responsibility yet in actual fact he refused to take responsibility for anything. I think that is one of the many hypocritical parts about this. Instead, all we had was a decade of a Liberal-National government that really was bereft of any responsibility at all. That certainly was a characteristic that we saw time and time again with the member for Cook. As I've said before, this lack of responsibility was very apparent in my region, with the devastating floods that we had just over a year ago. We've just had the first anniversary of those floods, and there is still a very long way for so many people to go with the size and scale and impact of the floods. But that anniversary that has just passed certainly reminded us of the inaction of the member for Cook. Firstly he failed to include the people in my electorate in some of the extended disaster payments, and that was devastating to people on the ground who had been through so much. Secondly, the member for Cook and former Prime Minster failed to come and talk to people on the ground throughout the area and hear firsthand what they had been through. He failed to take responsibility, as the Prime Minister, especially during those times of natural disaster. He was nowhere to be seen during the floods that devastated my region. When we look back also at the terrible bushfires over Christmas 2019, what was the response of the member for Cook and former Prime Minister? He said he didn't hold a hose—again, failing to take responsibility. During the devastating COVID-19 pandemic, there were many faults and flaws with the vaccine rollout and so many other issues. Again, according to the former Prime Minister, those were the job of somebody else. He would say: 'That's not my job. That's not my job.' It really is unforgivable for a prime minister to not take responsibility. Despite not taking responsibility for those issues, there was the member for Cook secretly having himself sworn in to take responsibility for all these other ministries. So many people in my region are really shocked, I think, and outraged because it is emphatically the job of the Prime Minister to maintain the public's confidence in political leaders and institutions. That is so vital to our nation. Yet here we are. I am very proud that the Albanese Labor government is taking decisive action with this bill to protect our democracy. The bill before us today has come about due to the very swift actions of our Prime Minister and Attorney-General in establishing an inquiry. The inquiry into the appointment of the former Prime Minister to administer multiple departments was led by former High Court Justice Virginia Bell. These actions are, of course, in stark contrast to the actions of the member for Cook. Our bill will amend the Ministers of State Act 1952 to provide for greater transparency and accountability in Commonwealth administration, ensuring that the people who actually vote us in here—the Australian public—have visibility over the offices that ministers hold. That is so vitally important. Really, it is the cornerstone of our democracy. Specifically this bill provides that the Official Secretary to the Governor-General must publish a notifiable instrument, which will be registered on the publicly accessible Federal Register of Legislation as soon as is reasonably practicable, advising 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's very important to have these measures in place. We are putting this bill forward now because it is so important to restore the confidence of the Australian people in our system of government and our institutions and to rebuild that integrity. This is a confidence Australians deserve to have. Anyone in this House can recognise how significant the actions of the member for Cook really have been. In fact, it's important to point out that three of his predecessors have come out and condemned this conduct. 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.' Former 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.' Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said: 'This is sinister stuff. This is secret government. This is one of the most appalling things I've ever heard of in our federal government.' The very idea that a prime minister would be secretly sworn in to other ministries is incredible. I think those comments from those former prime ministers reflect the sentiment we felt at the time when we first heard about this. Then again, there were more developments recently. We discovered that the member for Cook's secret appointments extended beyond himself. We know that multiple assistant ministers were appointed to multiple departments. Ben Morton, the former member for Tangney, was appointed to administer the home affairs department. The member for Capricornia was appointed to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. It was all secretive. Whilst these appointments may have been gazetted, the member for Cook specifically requested that there be no swearing-in ceremony. There was secrecy surrounding it. There was no public event to show it was happening and no changes to official ministry lists—again, just more disregard for our democracy and our democratic institutions. In relation to these most recent revelations, the member for McPherson has said: Given what we've heard, it's not surprising that I wasn't told about it. It's not okay to behave in the way the former Prime Minister and others have in relation to keeping information secret. …   …   … … at no time during those discussions did Ben Morton raise with me the fact he had been appointed to administer that. It just goes on and on. So we have the former Prime Minister not only appointing himself to portfolios but also secretly appointing other people to roles and, obviously, ensuring that that's kept secret as well. The member for McPherson continues: It's … extraordinary … it's very disappointing that this information is coming to light now. …   …   … Who knows what the reason was behind any of that … there was no reason to keep that hidden. I think that reflects how we felt recently when that further information was revealed. This bill is so important for us to restore faith in our democratic institutions and in our parliament. These are values we on this side hold very dear, and the Australian public do, and they deserve to. This bill, alongside our National Anti-Corruption Commission, will ensure that integrity can be restored. The commission will work to investigate and report on serious and systemic corruption. I was very proud to speak on this bill when it came to the House because that was a very big issue throughout the community for many, many years—they were calling for a national integrity commission. One of the major actions of our government was to introduce that. Under the previous government, they refused to do that for many, many years. They refused to have that particular commission in place that's so vitally important. We do that to restore faith in our institutions and our systems that the Australian people deserve. All of us here in this House, each and every one of us, are immensely privileged and honoured to be standing here, representing all areas right across this great country and also to be active participants in our democracy. We are incredibly privileged to be doing that. When actions are taken, like those of the member for Cook and the former Prime Minister, it does diminish that, because we know that, with the actions that the former Prime Minister took, it was impossible for the parliament and, therefore, the public to hold ministers to account for the running of departments. Members had no knowledge of what was going on at all. It is incredibly disappointing, and, in terms of the role of our parliament, it is incredibly wrong. It's important to have this new legislation in place to restore integrity. It must have been very disheartening for members across the chamber when it all came to light. It was incredibly disheartening for us and the entire general public. It still is absolutely absurd to think that someone in the role of prime minister could take that action as the former Prime Minister did and to just trash our democracy and our institutions, all of which we hold very dear. That's why we're committed to this legislation. It will fall to us—the Labor Party—to uphold the virtue of those institutions and the parliament, so that there is proper recourse and accountability, and we proudly do that because we believe in all those values and we fight for all those values. I certainly commend this bill to the House. It is very important. It will ensure that a person cannot ever again garner powers without that adequate and warranted accountability to the Australian people, to the Australian parliament and to the House. It does reflect very. very poorly on the member for Cook, the former Prime Minister, in taking those actions, and he should rightly be condemned by people in this House and the general public for that. We very proudly commend this bill, and we will work to upholding the integrity of our institutions that we hold dear. I commend the bill to the House. 10:04 Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Kingsford Smith The actions of the former Prime Minister, the member for Cook, in secretly swearing himself into ministries in 2020 and 2021, without the knowledge of ministers and without the knowledge of the Australian people, is one of the darkest periods in our nation's democracy. It's a fundamental principle of Australian democracy that the people get to choose who administers government on their behalf and that the people have the right to know who is administering government departments on their behalf. That was taken away by the actions of the member for Cook. It fell to media reports for the Australian people to find out in August last year that the former Prime Minister had sworn himself into six portfolios, including Treasury, Health, Finance and Home Affairs—quite serious and large government departments—without telling the ministers who were previously sworn in to administer those departments but, more importantly, not telling the Australian people that he had taken over responsibility for those portfolios—and during a health crisis. The other point that's remarkable about this is that it wasn't needed. He didn't need to conceal it from the Australian people. Given that we were in a health crisis, I'm sure if he had come out and said, 'Look, I've consulted with ministers and, given that people are getting sick and there's a great risk that many ministers may be struck down with COVID, we've taken the option of swearing additional people in to administer departments in case that occurs,' most people in the Australian public would have said, 'That's quite reasonable.' Certainly we, on this side of the chamber, would have said, 'Yes, that's something reasonable to do in a pandemic,' particularly, as the minister's pointed out, for the Department of Health. So it wasn't even needed. You'd have to question the motivations of the former Prime Minister the member for Cook in doing that. Why didn't he tell the Australian people? I'm sorry, but the justification that was given in the speech delivered by the member for Cook simply wasn't good enough. Australians were rightly horrified. They were horrified that they weren't told about this important principle of knowing who was administering government, particularly during a health crisis. When we found out, of course, the Albanese government acted appropriately and referred the issue to the Solicitor-General, who recommended that a broader inquiry be undertaken, and we appointed a former High Court judge, Justice Virginia Bell, to look into the matter. She conducted a thorough inquiry and made a number of recommendations to the government in November last year. This bill is a result of those recommendations. It's the government acting on the recommendations that were made independently by Virginia Bell. These reforms will ensure that the Australian people are able to access information relating to the composition of the Federal Executive Council and those appointed to administer departments and offices that ministers hold. Specifically, it will require the Official Secretary to the Governor-General to publish a notifiable instrument, registered on the Federal Register of Legislation, that the Governor-General has summoned and sworn an executive councillor to the Federal Executive Council and to publish notification of revocation. (Quorum formed)The notifiable instrument will include the name of the person, the department of state and the date on which they were sworn, appointed or directed. In cases of the revocation of the notifiable instrument, it will include the name of the person, the name of the former office and the date when such membership, appointment or direction was revoked. The notifiable instrument may also comprise a copy of an instrument issued by the Governor-General. This is part of the government restoring transparency and accountability to important decisions such as the swearing of ministers of state to administer government departments on behalf of the Australian people. It comes on the back of other reforms of this government that are aimed at improving transparency and accountability, most notably the National Anti-Corruption Commission, which, as we all know, the Australian people put front and centre of the recent election campaign because they wished to ensure there was government action on this issue. This government will make sure that the Australian people understand who their ministers of state are and know that they are administering government on their behalf. This episode also demonstrates why we need to begin a serious debate once again about having one of our own as our head of state. I want to make the point that the Governor-General did nothing wrong in the circumstances he was put in by the former prime minister, the member for Cook. The Governor-General acted entirely appropriately in swearing the member for Cook into those ministries. The convention is, under our system, the Westminster system, that the Governor-General acts on the advice of the government of the day, and that is what the Governor-General did. There is no fault at all with the Governor-General. The fault lies with the member for Cook. I believe that had we had an Australian head of state, one that was appointed by the Australian people either indirectly through the parliament or directly by election then that head of state would be accountable to the Australian people. A head of state put in that situation, such as the one the member for Cook left the Governor-General with, would be obliged, in my view, to ensure that the Australian people were informed of the former prime minister being sworn into those ministries. At the moment the way the Governor-General is appointed, as we all know, is that the Governor-General is the King's or Queen's representative. They swear allegiance to the King or the Queen when they take office. Their obligation is to be the representative of the King or the Queen. Mr McCormack 219646 So do you. Mr THISTLETHWAITE 182468 Members of parliament—you're right—swear allegiance to the Crown. We should be swearing allegiance to the Australian people who elected us, but we don't have the opportunity to do that. In my view, if we had an Australian head of state that was appointed by the Australian people, either through the parliamentary process or directly elected by the Australian people, they would have an obligation to the Australian people to ensure that the fundamental principle of democracy is upheld—the right to know who is administering government on their behalf. In such a scenario, if the Prime Minister were say to the Australian head of state, 'I want you to swear me in to these ministries,' the head of state would of course be obliged to do so; however, having been appointed by the Australian people, I believe they would also be obliged to say, 'If you don't tell the Australian people, I will.' That is another reason why, after we get through the process of looking at the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, which is the priority of the government this year, we need to begin a serious discussion with the Australian people about, in the future, debating whether or not we should have one of our own as our head of state, someone who is accountable to the Australian people and who represents Australia's unique culture and identity, improving the system of democracy that we have and cherish in Australia. Hopefully, some good can come of this dark period in our history when the Australian people were left none the wiser about who was administering government on their behalf, because of that dastardly act of the former Prime Minister to attempt to cover up—and that's implicit in the fact that he didn't tell anyone—the fact that he'd taken the ministries of other ministers, attempting to hide it from the Australian people. Thankfully, we now have a government that prioritises transparency and accountability. This bill delivers on the commitment to ensure that we have transparency and accountability in our decision-making, particularly when it comes to who is administering government on behalf of the Australian people. In the future, because of this reform, the Australian people will always know who has been sworn in as a minister of state and who is administering government departments on their behalf. 10:17 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan It is extraordinary that we're standing here today discussing the need for a bill to ensure that the public is informed when a ministry is assumed. We have a proud Westminster system, which we've inherited from our British brothers and sisters. This is something that's based on conventions and principles, and our great Australian parliament is built on these conventions. The main convention that was breached by secret ministerial appointments was that of accountability. This convention means that the ministerial decision-makers in the executive government are responsible to the parliament and the parliament is responsible to voters. As Solicitor-General Stephen Donaghue KC explained: Plainly enough, 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. Justice Bell, from the inquiry into the matter, explained: Given that the Parliament was not informed of any of the appointments, it was unable to hold Mr Morrison to account in his capacity as minister administering any of these five departments— Not one, not two, not three but five— As the Solicitor-General concluded, the principles of responsible government were "fundamentally undermined" because Mr Morrison was not "responsible" to the Parliament, and through the Parliament to the electors, for the departments he was appointed to administer. The conventions of responsible government are a fundamental pillar of our proud Australian democracy. They are required to maintain the public's faith in our political constitution. This bill, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, is essential to restoring our faith in democracy and upholding the conventions necessary for responsible government. One of the trends identified in the 2022 CSIRO report, Our future world: global megatrends impacting the way we live over coming decades, was that societies are increasingly demanding transparency and accountability. This underpins trust in governments, trust in science, trust in organisations. What we have seen in this decade is a decay in trust. There have been events such as 6 January 2021, the storming of the US Capitol. This occurred because of the inability of a leader to accept the limits of their power and to be accountable to the people. Then we had the 8 January 2023 storming of the Brazilian Congress, which was born out of the lack of trust in the democratic institutions in Brazil and their ability to deliver a peaceful transition of power. In my home electorate of Swan, one of my Australian-Brazilian constituents was shaken to the core by what was happening here. Our democracy is precious. I am so proud that we are a part of a democratic nation, but it is fragile, and we need to strengthen it. This is something that's worth fighting for, and this is something that the public wants. Maintaining the trust of the people is so important to make sure that we prevent things such as violent backslides. Whilst we might not have those conditions here, we should always be working to improve the health of our democracy and to strengthen the conventions. In speeches, sometimes we look at literary references. I think it's unfair to judge people in this place based on the way that they look. Aesthetics are based on your genetics. What I am interested in is character, because character is something that you have the ability to work on, to improve. Following literary references, what the member for Cook did as Prime Minister reminds me a little bit of the Lord of the Rings character Gollum. What Gollum wanted to do with the ring was extend his power and life beyond the realm of the ordinary. That's what Gollum was interested in. He was fascinated by this symbol. He wanted the power. He wanted to extend this power beyond his actual natural capabilities—and that's what we saw in this place. You know what? If people had known the truth, they would have been disgusted and they would have seen the true essence of what it was. What the member for Cook did as Prime Minister, in secretly assuming five ministries, was well beyond the ordinary and was a total defiance of the conventions of our parliamentary systems. I remember in my former workplace we changed some of the reporting of a particular thing, and I looked to my boss and said, 'I want rules and I want to know how to interpret them.' My boss said to me: 'I don't want to write rules, because I want you to use principles. I want you to orientate your decisions based on the principles.' That is what the Westminster system was based on. It was based on principles. It was based on this fundamental understanding that the people who are elected to this place have principles. What did we see? We saw a government and a leader that didn't represent that. Even though we didn't know this when we were doorknocking during my election campaign in Swan—we knocked on 45,000 doors—people could smell it. People could see it. They knew it. I would talk to people, and they would have the sense of: 'You know what? I just don't trust our Prime Minister. I just don't trust it.' And that smell could be smelt from across Australia. Not wanting to be held to account was a theme of the previous Prime Minister. I remember having a radio interview with Liam Bartlett, and I said that there are these characteristics of the member for Cook, which are that he's a liar and a bully. He said, 'But you're saying that from your side of politics.' And I was like: 'No. Let's have a look at the conservative side, and let me give you this long list of conservative people that are pretty grumpy about the character of this person.' First of all, from a WA perspective, the former prime minister's support of Clive Palmer's case against WA's hard borders, which saved lives, was fascinating. This was pushed in question time by the then opposition leader, Anthony Albanese, followed by the member for Whitlam. We also saw his minimised role in the robodebt saga. Despite being its creator, he passed the buck onto the department and his colleagues. Morrison, in December 2022, in the royal commission, said that legal advice warning that the scheme was unlawful was not raised directly with the ministers until late 2019, when the program was eventually shut down. That was when he left the country during the Black Saturday bushfires and sought to deflect criticism by saying, 'Don't hold a hose!' When we had the vaccine rollout face delays, the member for Cook stated, 'It's not a race,' rather than acknowledge that it was a failure of his government to ensure that we had secured enough vaccines for our nation. Then, with the 'bully' and 'liar' and 'not a team player' vibes, we had the Liberal senator for New South Wales Concetta Fierravanti-Wells say Morrison is 'an autocrat' and 'a bully who has no moral compass' and 'The fish stinks from the head.' I think that's what people could smell in the heart of Swan. The former deputy prime minister and member for New England said: 'He is a hypocrite and a liar, from my observations, and that is over a long time. I have never trusted him and I dislike how he earnestly rearranges the truth to a lie.' Then we have former Australia Post CEO Christine Holgate and the way her dismissal was handled, which she explained as 'one of the worst acts of bullying I have ever witnessed'. The member for Cook said that she needs to go. What did she do? She kept post offices open during a pandemic. She kept banking options available to regional Australians. As a girl born and bred in the Goldfields who loved going to the post office, and sitting up on the bench and seeing the wet roly thing that you put the stamps on, I love our post offices! They are the heart of regional towns and this is something that's fundamentally important. The truth is, Christine Holgate is seen as an amazing female business leader. And what did this government do? Mr McCormack 219646 Castigated by your side first, mind you. Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 It's about the outcomes and who is responsible for the outcomes. It's about the government of the day. Isn't it ironic, the member for McPherson saying that he needs to resign and leave parliament! Former New South Wales Liberal premier Gladys Berejiklian described the member for Cook as 'a horrible, horrible person' and bemoaned that he was 'more concerned with politics than people'. Then we have French President Emmanuel Macron, who said, when asked whether the member for Cook had lied to him, 'I don't think, I know.' He doesn't hold a hose, he doesn't order enough vaccinations and he says, 'It's not my job.' The thing that's hilarious is that during the election campaign we had these corflute signs that said, 'Not my job!' They were splattered throughout Western Australia. But the thing that's ironic is he had five extra jobs that we didn't know about. How is the Australian public to know? I think the irony of that is amusing—except for the fact that this is our democracy. This is a really special place to be. I would remind people that when we had the censure moment in the House and the member for Cook's colleagues—what was interesting for me, as I watched in this place, is that everyone, after the censure moment, lined up to shake the hand of this man, after this really monumental moment in this parliament. There was this line of support which, to me, was the symbolism of condoning the behaviours of our previous prime minister. I want to see an improvement in our parliament, and this is the reason that we have this bill, but I think that the other side need to reflect on their behaviours and reflect on what renewal looks like. If you continue to do what you're doing and get stuck in the past, you're not going to see where the rest of Australia is going. The support was amusing, and I think it's something that we need to recognise. The seventh edition of the House of Representatives Practice says: A censure motion, as the words imply, expresses more a disapproval or reprimand at particular actions or policies of the Government … A former Prime Minister being censured in the House of Representatives for the first time is historically significant. There was one exception. I remember looking across the chamber during that time, and there was one member I saw who, to me, looked like she had the weight of the whole other side of the House on her shoulders. Mr McCormack 219646 Who was it? Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 I'm not going to say. She wanted to see a restoration of our democracy, a restoration of the true greatness of what your side could be. But I only saw that from one person. Instead, there was this lining up like it was a wedding. Guess what? It was not a wedding. In my electorate of Swan, time and time again people have been telling me that the minimum requirement for being a member of parliament is integrity, principles. I think it's extraordinary that we have this bill where we need to actually look at this. Under the previous Liberal government, there were no actions on a national anticorruption commission. There was not a draft bill. Legislation was not introduced to the House. They were asleep at the wheel. The substance of this bill is making sure that we have a parliament that we can trust, a democracy that we can believe in and a democracy that we can have for future generations. 10:32 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 is only before us because of the extraordinary steps that were taken by the former Prime Minister the member for Cook, who, between March 2020 and May 2021, was appointed by the Governor-General to administer not only his own Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet but an additional five portfolios of the executive. He made himself the secret Minister for Health, the secret Minister for Finance, the secret Treasurer, the secret Minister for Home Affairs and the secret Minister for Industry, Science, Energy and Resources. In almost all cases, the gazetted portfolio minister was completely unaware of their understudy. But, even as late as last week, details of this deception were still being discovered, with the GuardianAustralia reporting that the former member for Tangney Ben Morton and the member for Capricornia, Michelle Landry, were appointed to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Department of Home Affairs. As the member for Swan has pointed out, the member for McPherson summed it up best in her interview with Sky News last Thursday. The member for McPherson said: 'It's not okay to behave in the way the former Prime Minister and others have in relation to keeping information secret.' But this is only the most recent chapter in this tale of deception. On 22 August 2022 the Solicitor-General's advice was publicly released, noting that the principles of responsible government were fundamentally undermined by the actions of the member for Cook. This finding directly challenged the coalition's response to the news about the then Prime Minister's action. They argued it wasn't against the law—a desperately narrow observation and one which shows little respect for the Australian parliament and the Australian people. The Solicitor-General's finding was repeated by the Bell inquiry, which observed that the principles of responsible government were fundamentally undermined. As a brief aside, can you imagine watching an episode of Yes, Prime Minister where Jim Hacker secretly takes on five extra ministries? We would have laughed and laughed and probably thought that, even for this show, they were stretching it a bit too far. But, in reality, these actions were the quintessence of how the Morrison government operated, with a command-and-control structure which inevitably led to mess and mismanagement. So much for cabinet government! The Liberals' mess and mismanagement is the culmination of a decade of inaction. No matter where you looked, you would find evidence of their mess and mismanagement. For example, when Labor was first elected in May 2022 there were one million backlogged visas; that's one million people who were awaiting a decision that they could come to or stay in this country, build a family here, visit their loved ones or bring much-needed skills to Australia. That's one million people the previous government was unable to help or was simply uninterested in helping. By the end of 2022 our Labor government had processed over four million visas since the election. That meant Australians were reconnected with loved ones before Christmas. And we were addressing the skills shortages the previous government left us and our economy. Despite hiring 400 staff to process applications, there is still work to be done in processing just under 600,000 visa applications. The Albanese Labor government is also working to clear the backlog of NDIS cases that was left by the previous government, who were too preoccupied with their harsh, unfair and illegal robodebt scheme. The government has established alternate dispute resolution processes to address NDIS appeals, resulting in a drastic reduction in the number of cases before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The latest numbers regarding the AAT backlog show that 4,401 NDIS cases have been resolved at the AAT since 1 June 2022—a 27 per cent reduction in overall caseload since May 2022, and 70 per cent of the 4,501 legacy cases active in May 2022 have now been resolved. I have seen the impact of this in my own electorate of Cunningham, where, with the support of the minister, my office has been able to bring resolution to the logjam of cases left by the former government. These are more than just statistics; these are brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers, husbands and wives who need support to live fulfilling and meaningful lives. This Labor government has turned to Australia's leading disability advocates and policy experts to help turn the tide on NDIA culture—including former Australian of the Year and Paralympic legend Kurt Fearnley AO, who is now chairing the NDIA board. Only now, in 2023, because of this government's decisions, are there five people with disability on the NDIA board—the largest number in the NDIA's history. Having people with disability feeling as though they are forced to fight for a moderate support package makes no sense. I, like the minister, acknowledge there is still more work to be done. The Liberals' mess and mismanagement also saw the Australian energy grid and energy users come under increasing pressures. Only the Albanese Labor government is making the investments that should have been made a long time ago—including in my community, where we have invested more than $1 million in a University of Wollongong study finding ways to keep Australia's grid secure through the renewable energy transformation. We are investing $10 million to establish the Energy Futures Skills Centre, located at the University of Wollongong, so we have the skilled workforce to build the grid of the future; $2.5 million for a renewable energy training centre at the Wollongong TAFE—I acknowledge my colleague the minister for skills and vocational education—which will include upgrades to equipment and teaching aids; $9 million to Hysata to develop and deliver new low-cost hydrogen in Port Kembla; and 400 community batteries to store excess energy from rooftop solar generation, like the one in Warrawong in my electorate, which is one of the lowest socio-economic areas. And we are listing the Illawarra as one of the first six proposed sites for offshore wind. All this is in addition to the New Energy Apprenticeships Program, which will support Australians to train for the jobs of future and help power Australia's path to net zero emissions. Apprentices training in eligible occupations in the clean energy sector can now attract up to $10,000 in direct support, helping them to manage the cost of living while they train in sectors that are essential to Australia's transition to a clean energy economy. Unlike the mess and mismanagement of the former government, this side of the chamber is getting on with the job of fixing the problems by investing in the skills that are needed for our future prosperity. The bill that is before us shows the government is delivering on its promises to the Australian people, promises that were made to restore trust and integrity to federal politics. Mr McCormack 219646 How're the power bills going? Ms BYRNES 299145 I don't know how you can argue against trust and integrity, but anyway. These include the recent introduction of legislation for a powerful, transparent and independent National Anti-Corruption Commission, one which the opposition failed to introduce. These measures will go some way to providing greater integrity and transparency around the processes of appointing elected officials to high office not only in this government but in governments of the future. This parliament has a responsibility to ensure that there is an effective system of accountability, checks and balances and strong parliamentary oversight of executive government. 10:41 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin Throughout the world, orderly societies function on acceptance of standards of behaviour, standards of behaviour that often evolve over time—over centuries—taking into account cultural values and general principles of common decency and respect for others. Many of those standards have over time become enshrined in law. Others simply become entrenched in culture and carry on from one era to the next. In Australia's case many of our standards and our values arise from our foundation constitution. We find within that the very values and laws which so much of our society is built on. This very parliament is part of those laws and those values, and this very parliament is guided by House practice, previously modelled on the UK House of Commons practice but, since 1981, from the Australian parliamentary practice. It has been entrenched in practice since Federation in 1901—and probably prior to that in the British parliament, upon which the Westminster system of government is modelled—that all ministerial and parliamentary appointments are immediately notified to parliament. The Westminster system of government and of parliament is frequently held up as a leading model of democratic parliamentary process, embracing transparency and accountability of government. Transparency and accountability are critical to public confidence in parliament and in government. The very reason this legislation, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, is before parliament is that former prime minister Morrison, the member for Cook, trashed centuries of tradition. In doing so, he trashed that structure of society here in Australia, trashed our Constitution and, quite frankly, trashed our democracy. He did that by failing to publicly disclose that during his last term in office, between March 2020 and May 2021, he had appointed himself to five ministerial portfolios without notifying this parliament, let alone the Australian people. It was only in mid-August 2022 that this information about the former prime minister's five ministerial appointments became public knowledge—that is, 2½ years after the events began and three months after the federal election in May 2022. It was, to my knowledge, the most disrespectful treatment of parliament and the Australian people by a prime minister since Federation. The irony of it all is that, because of the extraordinary powers held by the Prime Minister under the Westminster system, none of the former prime minister's actions were necessary. By convention, the Prime Minister can at any time override or replace a minister in a matter of minutes. Furthermore, and contrary to former prime minister Morrison's feeble response, there was no emergency which necessitated the unprecedented action which we saw him undertake. If the then Prime Minister believed he was acting in the national interest, why did he not disclose his actions to the Australian parliament, to the Australian people or even to his own party room? Surely, if there was unprecedented action required and it was in the national interest, the argument could have been well made at that time by the former Prime Minister. But he didn't. That then raises the obvious question: just why did he appoint himself, and find it necessary to appoint himself, to all of those different ministerial portfolios? He appointed himself as Minister for Health, Minister for Finance, Minister for Industry, Science, Energy and Resources, Minister for Home Affairs and Treasurer. Is it because he had lost confidence in his ministers but was too afraid to replace them because they might, in turn, turn on him and he might be voted out of office, or was he obsessed with power? I guess we'll never really know. We can make assumptions about what the reason was. Nevertheless, it really raises the question: why did he act in the way he did when the truth is that he didn't need to? Whatever the reason, the lack of transparency and the underlying dishonesty of not disclosing his actions further eroded trust and confidence in parliament and in politicians more broadly. The legislation that we have before us now prescribes transparency, prevents a reoccurrence of the member for Cook's actions and re-establishes some trust in the parliament. The truth of the matter is that this legislation should never have been necessary, because parliamentarians—starting from the very highest office in this land, that of the Prime Minister—should have acted with honesty and integrity. Had that happened, not only would the Australian people have continued to have at least some level of confidence and trust in this parliament but we would not today be having to try to legislate for that trust rather than have it because people acted in accordance with the expectations of them. Indeed, real trust and confidence are best assured when those in positions of authority voluntarily act honourably and with integrity. That's when you get real trust and confidence throughout the land. That wasn't the case in the last government, and perhaps it was a reflection of a failed government that for its whole term in office was riddled with acts which caused a loss of confidence in this parliament among the Australian people. This was a government that failed to enact a national anticorruption commission. In hindsight, it's quite clear that the Morrison government didn't want a national anticorruption commission because that commission would then very likely have had the power to investigate actions of the very government that established the national anticorruption commission, and that was the last thing they wanted. They could not bring in a national anticorruption commission that was not independent of government, and, once it was not independent of government, the former Prime Minister saw some problems with that body. This was the government that pursued the illegal robodebt scheme which we're hearing so much about right now—again a matter that the Morrison government did not want exposed and inquired into. As we're seeing right now, we understand why and we understand how detrimental to the lives of so many people that illegal action was. This was a government that stacked the Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal with 85 politically aligned appointments—appointments made simply to carry out the agenda of the government of the day and not make the impartial decisions that one would expect of that body. This was a government that rorted grant funds in a way that I have not seen before. There are many, many examples of that that people can talk about and analyse. The reality is that this was a government that did that each and every time funds were made available for a particular program. This was a government that paid $30 million for land valued, at best, at $3 million. Yet they've never explained why and how they came to that value. I hope there are going to be more explanations about all of that. This was a government that refused to disclose the $1 million of funding to the former Attorney-General and that also cut funding to the only other office we had in the land that might have been able to inquire into government operations, and that was the Auditor General 's office. I could go on about all of those matters that the Morrison government oversaw in its time in office. The truth of the matter is that the Morrison government was a government in office at a time when there were many matters before this parliament that the Australian people were asking questions about. The last thing that the government wanted was to be held accountable. So it turned out that, rather than the Prime Minister of the day setting up the bodies and ensuring transparency, he did the exact opposite. I just want to finish my comments with this perspective. As I said from the outset, we live in a structured society. We live in a country that is considered one of the most democratic in the world. Consider this. Had the Prime Minister, instead of taking on the responsibilities of five ministers, taken on the responsibility of each and every minister in the cabinet—which he could have done in exactly the same way that he took on the responsibility of those five—there was nothing stopping him from going all the way and replacing every single cabinet minister with himself. What sort of country would we have had then? Yet the system allowed him to do so and he took advantage of it for his own personal reasons. That is the seriousness of what he actually did. It would have effectively made him a dictator. It wasn't just five portfolios. That simply highlights what could have been possible under that scenario. I say to members opposite that this legislation is before the House because we don't want to see a repeat of that. It's before the House to try and restore the confidence that the Australian people, I believe, have for almost a century had in the parliament. It's before the House because we want this parliament to operate with transparency and integrity. Quite frankly, it had done so for nearly a century, and all of those traditions and all of that confidence were lost because of the action of one single person, the former member for Cook, the Prime Minister at the time. I commend this legislation to the House. 10:53 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 is an extremely important piece of legislation, but it's also an extremely important broader topic, because there are few things more important than the integrity of government and government processes and the way in which that is perceived by the broader community. So I'm going to spend a bit of time today talking about the arrangements that the former Prime Minister put in place but I'm also going to talk about the fact that these arrangements were emblematic of a broader pattern of stretching and bending rules, of acting in a way that undermined confidence in some of our key conventions and patterns of behaviour. This is something that is of first-order importance and that we, as a government elected just 10 months ago, are right in wanting to correct, because the behaviour of the previous government undermined institutions that were already suffering from challenges in public perception. The ANU's Australian Election Study found that Australian's satisfaction with democracy in 2019 was at its lowest level since the of the 1970s. Indeed, it had fallen in a little over a decade. Fifty-nine per cent of Australians were satisfied with democracy. This is 27 percentage points below the level that it had been at in 2007. I contend—I think, with very good reason—that the behaviour of the former Prime Minister when it came to secretly appointing himself to multiple portfolios and the behaviour of the previous government in stretching the rules when it came to allocating funds were material contributors to that broad trend. It's absolutely critical that this parliament, in a cross-partisan way, embrace a different way forward. This parliament has done so—or at least parts of this parliament have done so—in a range of ways, including by passing legislation in relation to the National Anti-Corruption Commission. Passing this bill will be a further step. But it's also important that we change the culture—the culture of the way in which ministers are held accountable in this place, the culture of the way in which ministers interact with government departments and the culture with which we appropriate funds. I want to go to the Bell report and its findings in relation to the way in which the previous Prime Minister, the member for Cook, was appointed to a number of portfolios. Going to the Solicitor-General's opinion, cited in the report, I quote paragraph 29: While I consider that Mr Morrison's appointment to administer DISER was valid— technically valid, in a legalistic sense— that is not to say that the absence of any notification of that appointment to the Parliament, the public, the other Ministers … was consistent with the principle of responsible government that is inherent in Ch II of the Constitution. In my opinion, it was not. In other words, 'in my opinion' it was not consistent with the fundamental principles of responsible government. I think it's worth referring to High Court statements on responsible government in other contexts. The High Court, in an earlier judgement, said that responsible government is a system by which the executive is responsible to the legislature and, through it, to the electorate. It is one of the most fundamental aspects of the Westminster system, where the executive is within parliament and the executive is answerable to parliament, in many forums, including question time, Senate estimates and many other forums. That is a fundamental tenet of how ministers, the executive and the Prime Minister are held accountable to this place, but also, even more importantly, to the electorate. The High Court has also said on previous occasions that responsible government is a fundamental, central feature of the Australian constitutional system. I want to go to another aspect of the Solicitor-General's opinion, and it is, in a sense, a more practical observation, which was made at paragraph 32: Plainly enough, 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. That's where this all leads to. At the most fundamental level of question time, who can know who should be asked about what if you don't even know who's holding which portfolios? If multiple ministers are holding the same portfolio, who's going to make the decision? We saw in at least one instance, the Prime Minister making a decision himself, overriding a minister. Who's to say that wasn't to occur in all sorts of other contexts, and, potentially, who's to say that that kind of overriding wasn't to occur in a way that wasn't particularly transparent? It fundamentally undermines question time in a very practical way. But, as I said before, question time is but one of the ways in which the executive is held to account. I would argue that it undermines all of those different mechanisms. Which minister should turn up to Senate estimates? It is a fundamental undermining of the core of our very system. Let's go to some of the practices that have arisen as a part of responsible government. There is the publication of ministerial appointments in the Gazette, and ministerial lists are published in parliament. One can go to these various mechanisms and argue whether or not they're strictly required, but to me that's not the point. To me the point is all of these different aspects of accountability and transparency are a reflection of how important responsible government is, and how responsible government can only be implemented in a way that is meaningful if it's done in a way that is transparent in a practical way. That kind of behaviour on that side of the House, and I hope across this parliament as a whole, should not be permitted again. Another aspect of this broader issue of integrity in government is the National Anti-Corruption Commission. I go to that because this was such a major topic of discussion in the previous term of government. The previous government was elected on a promise of implementing, of legislating a national anticorruption commission. We prioritised that in our first 10 months, amongst other important policy areas that needed remedying. The previous government promised to pass legislation to implement a national anticorruption commission. What we found ourselves with at the end of the last term was this ridiculous situation where a piece of legislation was in the public realm, but the government refused to bring it into this place because they claimed they didn't like the signals they were getting from the opposition. This was one of the more bizarre instances that I've ever seen of a government clearly breaching a commitment. They had the legislation. The legislation had taken much longer to draft and there had been much less consultation than was ideal, but the government had gotten around to having a draft piece of legislation. But there was this bizarre situation where they refused to bring it into this place. I have never seen something so unusual. What the previous government tried to do was to somehow blame everybody else in the chamber for that. They didn't like the fact that we wouldn't give a commitment for its carte blanche passage, that we said we wanted to have a look at it because we said we may disagree with parts of it. Let's go to the model the previous government, now opposition, put forward. The Centre for Public Integrity labelled it the 'weakest integrity commission in the country' after comparing it with a range of state and territory watchdogs. The former Victorian Court of Appeal judge Stephen Charles labelled it 'a fraud'. The former New South Wales Supreme Court judge Anthony Whealy said the coalition's model was 'a farce' because it wouldn't be able to scrutinise and investigate corrupt conduct by politicians, ministers, their staff or two-thirds of the Public Service. We had a flawed model that wasn't even brought into this place, and that was another key element of why integrity was so seriously undermined in the previous term of government. We have remedied that particular aspect of what had gone on in the previous three years—or one could say the previous nine years—of inaction. We have brought forward legislation and passed it, and none too soon. It's important to note that we find ourselves where we are, with a community that is sceptical of a lot of what goes on in the political realm, in part because of what the previous government did with such an important piece of infrastructure. I want to talk about the way in which taxpayers funds were allocated in a range of contexts by the previous government. Now this is referred to as rorts, and in many instances it went above and beyond what people could consider reasonable. But at the heart of this problem is that people lose faith in the way in which government allocates funds if governments don't do it in a way that involves good faith, that involves rigour and that involves transparency. As a parliament, as an executive a government, what we need to constantly remind ourselves is that it is important that we constantly retain the trust of the people, that it is such a precious thing and such a fragile thing. In so many instances those opposite pushed the boundaries in a cynical way, in such a way it didn't pass the pub test. Again, we can get into debating legalities, we can get into debating all the different aspects of it in an administrative sense, but so much of it just seemed unreasonable and politically cynical that I believe it was also a major contributor to the public's declining faith in our most important institutions. There was the $4.8 billion Urban Congestion Fund, in which 83 per cent of projects went to Liberal-held seats. There was, of course, the $660 million Commuter Car Park Fund, so many projects of which seemed to materialise in marginal seats at the last moment without rigorous analysis. Not one of the 47 car park sites promised by the coalition at the 2019 election was selected by the infrastructure department. These are just basic things that they were getting wrong—well, I suppose the word 'wrong' may not be the appropriate word. It depends on what your frame is. 'Inappropriate' is probably the best word there. There was, of course, the rorting of projects under the sports program. Nearly three-quarters, 73 per cent, of the projects that then sports minister Bridget McKenzie approved were not recommended by Sports Australia. Of course, there were the multicoloured spreadsheets, which, for anybody in the community with any familiarity with Excel or anything to do with the most basic IT, would set off alarm bells. This is the kind of example of government administration that makes people cynical. In both cases, we see not just a skewness in the allocation of funds but decisions being made either against or without any reference to departments. There was the Community Development Grants Program, $1.7 billion, distributed between 2013 and 2021. Safe Labor seats received $22 a head; marginal coalition seats and safe coalition seats received $202 a head; and marginal seats received $84 a head. Again, the optics of this are terrible, and those opposite were not able to demonstrate to us at any point in the last term a process that was transparent or rigorous where these projects had been allocated according to some kind of process of working it through with experts. Of course, this was the program to fund female change rooms and pools in remote areas of the country. As was noted so often in this place—and it became almost an icon of poorly appropriated funds—the North Sydney Olympic Pool somehow managed to squeeze itself in this very low-socioeconomic regional area. I could go on and on about this, but there are a number of major concerns. One is the sheer quantum. If you add up all these funds, we're talking billions of dollars. The second is the skewness. The third is the total lack of rigour. Of course people's alarm bells are going to ring when they're seeing Excel sheets and no reference to departments or departments being overridden. The immediate thing we're debating here today is a very important piece of legislation to remedy a breach in practice that I believe was completely unnecessary and egregious. It's a reflection of a previous government that acted in that manner in so many other ways—in delaying the national anticorruption commission and in the way it allocated funds. This bill is very important, and it's critical that this government continues to build on integrity in government to improve the way in which government operates for the sake of all. 11:08 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite The introduction of this bill, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, reflects the Albanese government's solid commitment to restoring trust in federal government and restoring integrity to parliament. It follows a shameful decade under the Liberal government, where harmful and destructive decisions destroyed lives and damaged trust in government. If left to fester, the Liberals' past performance could fundamentally undermine our democracy. But now the grown-ups are back in charge, and we are fixing the Liberals' mess. In my first address to the House, I spoke of the power of government to help people, to give everyone the ability to strive and succeed. I said, 'I entered politics mostly because of my beautiful daughters, Lily and Isobel,' and I declared that my greatest wish for them would be that they grow up bearing witness to a fair and just future for our country. This bill will enable that. Specifically, it addresses the former Liberal Prime Minister the member for Cook's secret appointment to administer several ministerial portfolios, in addition to his appointment to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The ministries the former Prime Minister adopted for himself included health; finance; industry, science, energy and resources; Treasury; and home affairs. Of course, there have been some recent revelations of new areas that other ministers were appointed to administer without colleagues being aware of it. It is just astounding this happened without cabinet and the member for Cook's colleagues being aware of it and certainly without the parliament, this House or, most importantly, the Australian people being aware of it. It reflects the seriousness of these actions in undermining our system of government. The advice of the Solicitor-General, Dr Stephen Donaghue KC, were made public on 22 August last year. It noted that the principles of responsible government were undermined by the actions of the former Prime Minister. This led to the Bell inquiry and, importantly, recommendations contained in this bill to ensure that no such secretive or damaging actions by a prime minister, or any minister, can occur again. We've accepted these recommendations, because the Albanese government knows that high standards in parliament matter—high standards that demonstrate respect for parliamentary conventions like accountability, integrity and transparent decision-making. These conventions underpin our democracy, but under the previous Liberal government rules were broken, transparency in decision-making was ignored and democracy was challenged. It is time to fix the damage done after a decade of Liberal mismanagement. This bill requires that the Official Secretary to the Governor-General publish a notifiable instrument on the Federal Register of Legislation as soon as reasonably practicable in the following circumstances: when 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. Further, the bill will require notification on the revocation of any of these positions to be published. These measures will ensure transparency and accountability in the appointment and revocation of ministerial portfolios by making these changes public knowledge as soon as possible. We need that public knowledge. We want to prevent a repeat of the secret appointments that occurred in the past. Without this transparency. it's impossible for the parliament to hold individuals accountable for their actions. Moreover, this bill reinforces the importance of the trust among ministers and in the Westminster system's conventions. The sad and sorry chapter of Australian history that we witnessed should never be repeated. This bill represents a rapid response to the findings of the Bell inquiry. By requiring public disclosure of ministerial appointment changes and revocations, this bill will demonstrate a truly transparent parliament and bolster public trust in our democratic system. It has been sorely tested, and we need to ensure that the public have faith in their parliament and in their government. It is crucial that we implement every measure to maintain integrity in our institutions. It should be noted that even the former Prime Minister's colleagues have questioned the member for Cook's actions and motivations and their capacity to undermine our democratic system. As many of my trusted colleagues have already highlighted, former prime ministers have weighed in on this matter. 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. Similarly, former Prime Minister Tony Abbott acknowledged the unconventional nature of the situation, saying: I'm just not going to defend what was done. It is just highly unconventional , highly unorthodox and shouldn't have happened. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull went even further, describing the situation as 'sinister stuff' and 'one of the most appalling things I've ever heard in our federal government'. Turnbull added: I mean, the idea that a Prime Minister would be sworn in to other ministries secretly is incredible. These quotes from former prime ministers demonstrate the gravity of the situation and the impact it has had on our democracy. The actions of the former Prime Minister were extraordinary and concerning, and it's deeply disappointing that we must work to prevent such abuses of power from happening in the future. This amendment will achieve this, alongside establishment of the powerful, transparent and independent National Anti-Corruption Commission as the centrepiece. Additionally, we have followed through on our election promise and established a royal commission into the Liberal government's illegal and callous robodebt scheme, which hounded vulnerable people for debts they did not have. It resulted in unnecessary anguish, anxiety and, in some very tragic circumstances, suicide. Passing this legislation will be a step forward, righting the wrongs of the member for Cook and ensuring that no future prime minister will repeat the actions of the former prime minister. It is a sad day when we must legislate to enforce conventions that should be fundamental to our parliamentarians who are elected to this place. Respect for our democracy and the Australian people should be the driving force behind our actions. None of us should ever seek to undermine those conventions, nor should we attempt to manipulate the system for our own benefit. The opposition's support of this change is an important acknowledgement of that fact. While I do not take pleasure in revisiting this issue—the disregard shown by the former Prime Minister towards his role and responsibilities—it's crucial that we take steps to ensure accountability and transparency in the future. Our government is committed to upholding these values and I am proud to support this legislation. This legislation represents an important step towards restoring the public's trust in our democracy and holding those in power accountable. Let us remember that we are here to serve the Australian people, not ourselves or our own ambitions. Let us uphold the conventions and principles of our democracy and let us ensure that no prime minister can ever undermine them again. The Australian people deserve nothing less. 11:17 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner This Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 seeks to implement the first recommendation of the Report of the Inquiry into theAppointment of the Former Prime Ministerto Administer Multiple Departments by Virginia Bell AC. That first recommendation requires the publication in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette of appointments to administer departments, directions to a minister of state to hold an office, the swearing in of an executive councillor or the revocation of any of these appointments. This is only the first of six recommendations from the Bell report, and it's worth recalling the conduct of the former Prime Minister that led to this point. Ms Bell's report found that the member for Cook had been appointed to administer six of the 14 departments of state. None of these appointments were disclosed to the parliament or the public, and, in several cases, the minister who was responsible for the portfolio wasn't even told. Ms Bell described the member for Cook's explanations of these appointments as 'not easy to understand', which puts it charitably. She noted that the appointments were not necessary, as an acting minister could have been appointed in a matter of minutes. The appointments to the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources, the Department of Home Affairs and Treasury had, in the words of Ms Bell, 'little connection to the pandemic'. They were, instead, made because the member for Cook was concerned: … that the incumbent minister might exercise his or her statutory powers in a manner with which Mr Morrison— the member for Cook— did not agree. Indeed, the member for Cook's appointment to the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources appears to have been made directly so that he could overturn the then minister, the member for Hinkler, Keith Pitt's decision to approve an offshore gas project. Just last month, the Federal Court overturned the member for Cook's decision due to questions about the member for Cook's impartiality in making the decision. Ms Bell stated the conduct of the member for Cook had 'fundamentally undermined the principles of government'. She also said: … the lack of disclosure of the appointments to the public was apt to undermine public confidence in government. And: … the secrecy with which they had been surrounded was corrosive of trust in government. The Solicitor-General, Stephen Donaghue KC, stated in his advice that Mr Morrison's appointments were: … inconsistent with the conventions and practices that form an essential part of the system of responsible government prescribed by Ch II of the Constitution. That is because it is impossible for Parliament and the public to hold Ministers accountable for the proper administration of particular departments if the identity of the Ministers who have been appointed to administer those departments is not publicised. We see this every sitting day in question time, when the Speaker calls a minister to answer a question. And yet in question time under the former government, the former prime minister could well have popped up and said, 'Well, as it happens, I am also the Treasurer, I'm also the resources minister.' This would have been extraordinary, but it was the state of affairs that prevailed under the Liberals. Just last week we learned that the appointments went beyond the member for Cook. Ben Morton was appointed to administer the Home Affairs Department and the member for Capricornia, Michelle Landry, was appointed to administer the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. While those appointments were gazetted, the member for Cook specifically requested there be no swearing-in ceremony, no public events, no changes to official ministerial lists. The reaction from the general public has been one of shock and outrage, but so, too, has been the reaction from fellow Liberal Party colleagues. Josh Frydenberg described these appointments as 'extreme overreach'. That's the reaction he gets from his Lodge flatmate. Another one of the former prime minister's flatmates, the member for Fadden, Stuart Robert, described the appointments as 'nuts'. Those are the character references he gets from his flatmates. The member for McPherson, Karen Andrews, said, 'To be honest, I feel the Australian people were betrayed.' She has asked the member for Cook to stand down from parliament as a result of this affair. The member for Hinkler, Keith Pitt, detailed his reactions in Niki Savva's book Bulldozed. He said that after being told in June 2021 that the member for Cook had sworn himself in as resources minister to block the PEP-11 project, the member for Hinkler considered releasing a statement unilaterally approving the project. He also considered resigning. He ultimately did neither, but only to avoid plunging the government into further crisis. Then there is Malcolm Turnbull, a former prime minister and the member for Cook's predecessor. He has described the multiple ministries scandal as 'sinister' and: … one of the most appalling things I have ever heard in our Federal Government. He went on to say that the most troubling thing about the saga was 'why the rest of the system went along with it. That's a thing I find most troubling.' Mr Turnbull is right. This bill would mitigate a similar scenario in the future by ensuring that such decisions were made public. It is a bill that we hope the opposition will support, but that is despite the fact that the opposition leader has described the Bell inquiry as 'a witch-hunt'. It is extraordinary that the Leader of the Opposition would downplay the Bell inquiry, an inquiry that was conducted by a former High Court Judge, an inquiry which went to a scandal that has rocked Australians and rocked many former Liberals. The member for Cook's actions in these secret ministries were just one of the many ways in which the Liberals damaged our democracy. We saw my own charities portfolio, harm minimisation and environmental charities, including the Grace Tame Foundation, unable to get deductible gift recipient status because the Morrison government disagreed with their political stance. We saw the gagging of organisations that wanted to speak out, from the community legal centres to overseas aid organisations to antipoverty groups. We saw the promise of a national integrity commission before the 2019 election, yet never delivered in the 2019 to 2022 term. We saw the sports rorts scandal, the land grants scandal, the stacking of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. We saw, under the former Liberal government, cuts to a range of important government programs, ranging from the ABC to the Audit Office itself. When the Audit Office discovered substantial improprieties, such as the fact that the former government had paid 10 times too much for land for the new Sydney airport, the former government's approach was to cut $14 million from the Audit Office. We saw contracts given out to entities that were manifestly unable to handle then. We saw money going to entities, such as the Great Barrier Reef Foundation, that were clearly not capable of managing the significant government contracts to which they were being allocated. We saw the ultimate resignation of the sports minister for the sports rorts scandal and the failure of the member for Cook to take responsibility for this failure in public administration. Australians look back at the Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments and shake their heads at the way in which these governments mismanaged public finances. During the pandemic we saw almost $20 billion of taxpayer money going to firms with rising revenue. The JobKeeper payment was necessary in order to save jobs, but we didn't save jobs by giving $20 billion to firms whose revenues were going up, rather than down. Firms from Harvey Norman to AP Eagers received taxpayer money under the JobKeeper program, a waste which ultimately amounted to some $2,000 for every Australian household. No-one in this parliament denies that JobKeeper was an important program, but what Australians were so frustrated by was the mismanagement of our public finances that saw $2,000 per Australian household go to firms whose revenues were going up, rather than down. This is an important bill which deals with one of the shocking scandals that occurred during the Liberals' time in office. It is probably one of those scandals that will serve as an example in public administration classes for years to come. When Australian students are looking at some of the worst moments of public maladministration in Australian history, they will look back at the multiple ministries scandal as an example of one of the incidents that really characterise the way the member for Cook and his colleagues saw public administration. In conclusion, these are weighty matters, but it did seem appropriate to add a little levity to the proceedings. So I asked ChatGPT if it could provide me with a moment of light-hearted humour to encapsulate the multiple ministries scandal. It suggested the following, which I will conclude with: 'Apparently Scott Morrison was secretly sworn in as minister for time travel. It's the only way he could've been in Hawaii and Canberra at the same time.' 11:29 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand A familiar feeling flooded over me preparing to speak on this debate. It was that feeling of incredulity that we had so frequently in opposition at the disfunction and the extraordinary situation that the previous Morrison government put this country into, the trashing of long-standing norms of responsible government, of good governance. Turning up to work some days you couldn't believe the kinds of things that were happening in the previous Morrison government. The multiple ministry scandal—even saying it out loud is an extraordinary thing—was probably the nadir of this. You cannot get a better encapsulation of what a megalomaniacal weirdo the member for Cook was as Prime Minister, and the damage and harm that his saviour complex did to the institutions of Westminster government in our country. The Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 demonstrates the Albanese government is delivering on its promise to restore the Australian people's confidence in our federal system of government and to rebuild integrity in public sector institutions, processes and officials. The bill will implement reforms to provide for greater transparency and accountability in Commonwealth administration. I saw a tweet this morning from the Manager of Opposition Business complaining this bill was just 'an administrative bill about Ministers' and that it wasn't worth the time of the parliament. It really shows that those opposite have learned nothing from their chaotic time in government and have learned nothing about the costs of their maladministration and chaos to Australia. This bill is about the most fundamental responsibility of all of us in this chamber—the basic functioning of responsible government. When responsible government is trashed, the quality of government suffers. Our democracy suffers. Our national interest suffers. It is crucial the Albanese government acts to rectify the reckless trashing of these institutions by the previous government. The purpose of this bill is to implement the first of the six recommendations of the Bell inquiry. It follows the steps the government has taken to establish a powerful, transparent and independent national anticorruption commission—the need for which became, unfortunately, obvious under the previous government. The Prime Minister has spoken about the importance of respecting parliament and its role. I know that he takes the obligations of his office incredibly seriously. That's why the recent censure of the member for Cook for his trashing of Westminster institutions and responsible government was so important. The fact that that censure was necessary was, for me, a profoundly sad moment; it was one of the low points of my time in this chamber, that that was necessary. But ignoring the member for Cook's conduct would have left us all complicit. It would have left us all saying, 'Well, that was alright; we're okay with that.' Instead, this government is committed to addressing the loopholes that allowed this abuse of power by one individual, enabled by those around him, to occur. The Australian people now have a government that understands the importance of transparency and accountability, and they are entitled to know who is appointed to administer the departments of their state, who comprises their executives and what offices they hold. We thought this was self-obvious. This information should be available to Australians to find out for themselves, not only when a journalist does, not only when a former prime minister takes it upon himself to brag about his trashing of Westminster institutions to journos writing a book about the dysfunction of his previous government. Our democracy is precious. As we've seen overseas, from the assault on the Capitol building in the US to the recent events in the transition of government in Brazil, no-one around the world can take democracy for granted. All of us in this building hold our democracy in trust for the Australian public. This institution is bigger than all of us. Our conduct in this chamber needs to look to the big picture. We need to put the institution and our democratic traditions ahead of ourselves as individuals, ahead of our narrow paths and political interests. We need to leave these institutions of our democracy in better shape than that in which we received them for those who follow us. Unfortunately, the previous government did damage that will take some time to rectify in terms of public trust. As details emerged of the member for Cook's actions, this government referred the matter to the Solicitor-General. We acted. The advice of the Solicitor-General, Dr Stephen Donaghue KC, was published on 22 August 2022, and the findings were damning. Between March 2020 and May 2021, the member for Cook was appointed by the Governor-General to administer five departments of state: Health; Finance; Industry, Science, Energy and Resources; Treasury; and Home Affairs. This was not made public and was only revealed when the Prime Minister told on himself to journalists writing a book about him. In the words of the Solicitor-General: The principles of responsible government are fundamentally undermined by the actions of the former government … 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 astonishing that we even have to say that in this parliament. The findings of the Solicitor-General made clear the need for an appropriate inquiry into the member for Cook's conduct, and the inquiry into the appointment of the former Prime Minister to administer multiple departments was led by Ms Virginia Bell AC, an outstanding Australian. Ms Bell was eminently qualified for the role, having served as a justice of the High Court for 12 years, following an extensive legal career. The purpose of the Bell inquiry was to examine, and report on, the facts and circumstances surrounding the member for Cook's appointments and the implications arising from them. Ms Bell invited interested individuals and organisations to make submissions, and many did. Contributions were made by current and former public servants, ministers and ministerial advisers, along with academics and other experts in the field of constitutional law and public administration—people with a stake in the functioning of our parliament and our democracy. At the outset of the inquiry, Ms Bell also wrote to the leaders of the minor political parties represented in the parliament, the Independent parliamentarians, the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate, inviting them to be heard—all stakeholders in, and trustees of, our democracy. Ms Bell's report was provided to the government on 25 November 2022. She conducted her inquiry with professionalism and dedication. Her report is comprehensive and even-handed. It is an important contribution to the institutional strength of our democracy. Ms Bell found that the member for Cook's appointments were 'unnecessary', as acting ministers could have been appointed 'in a matter of minutes'. The facile justifications of the member for Cook for these appointments—that somehow he needed to be able to take control and save the nation himself, solely, in the face of the COVID pandemic—didn't bear any scrutiny at all. Indeed, the later three appointments to industry, science, energy and resources, home affairs and Treasury, according to Ms Bell, 'had little connection to the pandemic' and were made because of the member for Cook's concern that 'an incumbent minister might exercise his or her statutory powers in a manner with which the member for Cook didn't agree'. It was about megalomania. The institutions and conventions of our democracy are designed to stop any individual from taking power in this way. It is important that we all assert that this was not okay. The member for Cook has learned nothing. He didn't agree to meet with Ms Bell and communicated with her only through lawyers. He has no shame. Ms Bell described the member for Cook's explanations as 'not easy to understand'. I didn't understand them, either—particularly his assertion in this chamber in defence of himself in relation to the censure motion that, if we had just asked him, he would have told us the secret ministries that he had been appointed to. The government has accepted all of Ms Bell's recommendations, with this bill implementing recommendation 1. The bill provides that the Official Secretary to the Governor-General must publish a notifiable instrument, which will be registered on the publicly accessible Federal Register of Legislation as soon as is reasonably practicable, advising that the Governor-General has chosen, summoned and sworn an executive councillor to the federal Executive Council under section 62 of the Constitution; appointed an officer to administer a department of state; or directed a minister of state to hold an office under section 65 of the Constitution. This bill will apply to appointments made by the Governor-General that take place following the commencement of the act. In the time remaining to me, I want to make a few points. Dysfunction has consequences. The former Prime Minister's trashing of convention isn't just a function of Canberra bubble gossip. I do note the shadow minister for home affairs' personal hurt and chagrin at this conduct and her desire for the member for Cook to leave parliament. I agree with that, but it isn't about personal hurt feelings; it's about the hurt national interests. The member for Cook's megalomania had implications for my own portfolio and for Australia's relationship with the world. Echoing his bragging to journalists about these secret ministries, the member for Cook has recently bragged about the way he sidelined my department—the department for foreign affairs—his foreign affairs minister, Senator Marise Payne, and the then Secretary to the Department of Foreign Affairs, Frances Adamson, from the development of the AUKUS proposal until the very last moment. We hear from the same journalist, Simon Benson in an article headlined 'Scott Morrison kept AUKUS secret from cabinet ministers and senior diplomats'. Benson says, 'Senior diplomats and cabinet ministers were kept in the dark over AUKUS.' He quotes Mr Morrison: It was the most remarkably held project that I suspect many could ever recall … This secrecy was so essential because the second it moved outside those who only needed to know, it was a risk. …   …   … This wasn't 007 but it was essential to its success … Mr WATTS 193430 I hear the interjections from the member for New England. I wonder whether the member for New England can explain why the former member for Cook told Joe Hockey, our ambassador in the US, about AUKUS. He told George Brandis, the high commissioner to the UK, and he told two people who worked for Marise Payne and Frances Adamson about this but not their bosses? Why was it Joe Hockey and George Brandis? Why are they different to Frances Adamson and Marise Payne? What is the common denominator there? Mr Conroy 249127 I wonder! Mr WATTS 193430 I can't wonder! I don't know! It's a very peculiar state of affairs. It's a symptom of the crazy dysfunction and personal, individual megalomaniacal nature of that member for Cook and his personal weirdness about Australia's national interest. And, really, this was a bloke worried about national security leaks! That was his justification for not telling his own foreign affairs minister. This is a bloke who gave a TikTok of the deliberations of the National Security Committee to journalists writing a book about him. The calls are coming from inside the building. The threat to the national security comes from the member for Cook, not the people he was keeping on the outside. This had real consequences for the announcement of AUKUS in our region. Our partners in the region weren't appropriately briefed when AUKUS was announced in South-East Asia, in the Pacific. If the member for Cook had brought the department of foreign affairs in on the process, this could have been remedied. That initial announcement could have better served the national interest. Prime Minister Albanese trusts his ministers and runs a functioning cabinet government, and the recent announcement of the Optimal Pathway for the AUKUS agreement benefited as a result. Minister Wong; the Minister for International Development and the Pacific, beside me; and the Prime Minister made more than 60 calls into our region—calls with our partners, calls with people who we wanted to understand our rationale of why we were entering into the biggest investment in our defence capability in our history. These calls, this groundwork, this diplomacy, this exercise of our foreign policy, paid dividends. It's reflected in the way that the optimal pathway announcement was received in our region by our partners. Our democracy matters. It's our most precious national asset. Those of us in this building, and particularly in the ministry, hold it in trust for the Australian people. But it's not an abstract concept; it underpins Australia's freedom, Australia's prosperity and the way that our society operates. It only exists because of the norms and the laws and the constitutional arrangements that our country operates under. We all have an obligation in this building and in the cabinet to put this institution, our democracy, before our own individual political interests. The previous government trashed this institution, and all of us suffer as a consequence. It's good gossip for the political mills—who left who out of the loop. Journalists like to write about these things, but there were real consequences for the Australian national interest from this, and that's what this bill is designed to remedy. We believe in responsible government on this side of the chamber. We believe in defending our Westminster institutions. It's one of the foundations of Australia's security, freedom and prosperity. We will do what is necessary to invest and renew these institutions going forward. I implore those opposite to learn a few lessons from the dysfunction of the previous government. Don't tie yourself to the toxic legacy of the member for Cook. We can all do better than that. The sooner he is out of this building the better. But we all need to move on from this and invest in this institution for the benefit of the Australian people. 11:44 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle I'm glad to speak on this bill, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, and to follow that excellent contribution from the member for Gellibrand. This is a bill that shouldn't need to be passed because what it seeks to correct should never really have been at risk. We shouldn't need to come in and legislate for basic honesty and transparency and clarity around our system of governance. We shouldn't need to legislate the expectation that the Prime Minister would be straight with the Australian people and that a government would be straight with the Australian people. You would think that, as a basic duty and obligation, anyone who has the privilege to serve in this place would start with that as No. 1 on their priority list when they come into this House. We know that rules, conventions, norms and sensible behaviours—the sensible observance of integrity—are critical to the good function of government in a way that is very, very substantial, and we know that bad practice leads to bad outcomes. We know that weak and perverted governance leads to incompetent and dishonest government. We know that because we just spent the last several years experiencing that. The Australian community just spent the last several years seeing that up close and personal. That kind of perverted, dishonest, incompetent, unaccountable government inevitably hurts the Australian community, and it hurt the Australian community in this case. Robodebt is what happens when you have a government that is a stranger to transparency, accountability and decency. That's what happens. Tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Australians get, at the very least, the fright of their lives—at the very least. Tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Australians get hit with debt notices that are wrong and unlawful, and the consequences in some cases, as we know, are the gravest that there can be. There are circumstances that have been disclosed to the robodebt royal commission that involve people taking their lives because the former government, the coalition government, was so awfully incompetent and unaccountable. It wasn't just a case of ignoring the sensible requirements of transparency and accountability that we ought to be able to take for granted; it was a case, in many instances, of intentionally perverting or covering up matters that the Australian community deserved to know about. It happened with the secret multiple ministerial moonlighting of the former Prime Minister, the member for Cook. It happened with the secret million-dollar donations to the legal fund of the former Attorney-General. It happened on multiple occasions. It happened with the secret legal advice—that never saw the light of day until all that catastrophic harm had occurred—that said that robodebt was wrong. As the member for Gellibrand just said, the one thing that has been notable in the 10 months since the change of government is that, in relation to all of those awful failures, there has not been one skerrick of collective reflection and responsibility from those opposite. Is it too much to ask, when you have patently failed in your obligations and your duties to the Australian people, that you at least acknowledge that, take responsibility for it and apologise for it? Under the previous government, long gone were the days when a minister, looking squarely in the face of the kind of failure that robodebt represented, would not have any particular courage but would just do the basic decent thing and say: 'I have to take responsibility for that.' There were, frankly, multiple ministers who could have done it. They could've had a conversation amongst themselves about who was perhaps best placed to wear that opprobrium, but so far that has not happened to one degree. We've not heard the word 'sorry' once from any of the people involved. When the parliament gave those opposite the opportunity for a bit of self-reflection, a bit of ex post facto accountability, those opposite weren't interested. The fact is that, when this House censured the member for Cook, which, frankly, was really the bare minimum that ought to have occurred in terms of recognising the gravity of the failure that has occurred and the deception of the Australian people that has occurred, those opposite voted to oppose that motion and essentially to support that conduct, and they gathered around the member for Cook afterwards, smiling and patting shoulders and shaking hands. I understand that. I've actually got nothing against people showing care for one another. The fact that someone on the other side might have taken the time afterwards to say privately to the member for Cook, 'It's a bit of a tough day when you get censured in the House of Representatives,' is okay. Looking after one another through tough times is okay. But when you all have been tarnished by that kind of behaviour, to vote against the very sensible and, frankly, relatively mild recognition in the Australian parliament of something that should never ever have occurred—a bloke secretly swearing himself into multiple ministries, not even telling the ministers responsible. When that occurs, rather than taking the opportunity to say 'That was wrong. We recognise that was wrong. We don't want that to ever happen again,' and reflecting the sombre and serious nature of what a censure in the House of Representatives represents, you get people who couldn't rush over quickly enough to smile and laugh and clap the member for Cook on the back as if nothing had occurred, and that tells you a lot about the state of denial that those opposite are in. As I have said, the institutions and conventions that guide the best form of our Westminster parliamentary system are not window dressing. They are not optional extras. It is not the difference between whether you wear a tie or don't wear a tie in this place. They are the guardrails for proper government. They are the guarantors of competence and integrity. They are the buffers against incompetence and consequential harm that follows. If we can't do those things better and if we can't set right some of the failure that we saw under the previous government, then democracy in Australia will be weaker for it, and the quality of government that the Australian people receive will be weaker for it. It is worth noting that the—(Quorum formed) Clearly that was too much truth for those opposite. I mean, why take responsibility and show some accountability for the frankly disgusting behaviour of the former government when you can just play silly games, when you can get up and interrupt people in the middle of saying something that is pretty important? I think the Australian people don't ever again want to see a situation where you have a secretive and deceptive Prime Minister going about arrogating power to themselves in multiple important ministries, appearing not to even remember which departments they'd been sworn into. The truth had to be dragged out of the member for Cook; that should be recognised. The member for Cook couldn't decide or remember, apparently, exactly which secret alternative ministerial costumes he had put in the closet for his use, and he never ever acknowledged the fact that what he did was wrong or unnecessary. As the member for Gellibrand said, he tried to excuse it afterwards with a whole range of pathetic excuses, including suggesting that it was in the nation's interest and it was better for the nation's defence and security. Frankly, that is ridiculous. The truth only came out, as we know, because the member for Cook, the former Prime Minister, bragged in relative secret to the writers of a book about it, because he thought the story would somehow reflect well on him afterwards—that it would show his preparedness to do anything, in his own twisted version of high-handed, top-down government. Not only did it take weeks and weeks of multiple interviews for the member for Cook to make clear the actual details of the various ministries that he'd secretly sworn himself into, but in the last few weeks we've learned that the former member for Tangney was sworn into one of his colleagues' departments. We've also learned that the member for Cook was very proud of the way that he kept the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister for Foreign Affairs completely in the dark about some of the most serious defence and security matters that were under contemplation at the time. Australian democracy matters. All of it matters—the hardware and the software, the rules and the conventions, and certainly the behaviours and the norms. Ironically, from a coalition government whose twin ideological themes are, on the one hand, faith in the markets and, on the other hand, a desire to protect and maintain important conservative institutions, we had a complete abandonment of both of those kinds of thought. There was no interest in sensible market solutions to big issues like climate change or waste and recycling and there was a complete trashing of Australia's democratic institutions, norms and conventions. That is something that we can only hope they will reflect upon, but, from what we've seen to date, there's little evidence of that. Unfortunately, I think we're going to have to keep saying this in here multiple times every day until something changes: it is still astounding that a government can inflict illegal and wrong debt notices on tens of thousands of the most vulnerable Australians and that those responsible can be incapable—as yet—of saying openly that it was wrong, that it was a scandalous piece of incompetence—harmful, immoral incompetence. Not one person is prepared to say that. The coalition parties, individually or together, are not capable of saying that. There's been no ministerial accountability. There's been no acknowledgement at the leadership level. This government wants to put Australia democracy on a much healthier and higher quality foundation. We're doing that with this bill—which shouldn't really need to be passed—to simply make it crystal clear, particularly to those opposite, that Australians are entitled to expect accountability and transparency from their government. We've done it with the National Anti-Corruption Commission, and we'll continue to do it through the leadership and conduct of the Albanese Labor government. 11:59 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton I'm going to use a couple of words that we haven't seen for a while, and they are 'transparency' and 'accountability'. They're words that mean a lot inside this building, but out in the rest of Australia people often don't know what 'transparency' and 'accountability' are when it comes to the Westminster system of democracy. But they are essential terms, in the same way that, in the military—as I see the member for Solomon leaving—words like 'honour' and 'loyalty' might be essential. They're words that people live their lives by. Similarly, when it comes to good government, words like 'transparency' and 'accountability' must inform all that you do in government. Government is a messy business. It is not perfect. As they say, democracy is the worst system of government, but it's better than all the rest. Democracy only works when there is transparency and accountability. Sadly, those two words, 'transparency' and 'accountability', are not words we can associate with the former Morrison government. How many times did they, through their actions, fail to be accountable and transparent? Because of my love of poetry, I might quote Elizabeth Barrett Browning: 'Let me count the ways.' Remember the member for Hume hiding the rises in electricity prices till after the election? Remember the colour-coded spreadsheets of sports rorts? Remember the park-and-rides for train stations that didn't actually exist? That was a Victorian special, I think—more pork than a piggery. Unbelievable. Remember robodebt? How shocking has the testimony at the royal commission been—400,000 Australians, some of them our most vulnerable Australians, robbed by a government. Remember the coalition government failing to order enough PPE at the start of the pandemic, then ordering PPE from overseas instead of backing in our local manufacturing businesses? Remember them not ordering enough vaccines? Remember them picking fights with premiers instead of working together through one of Australia's most difficult hours, through the pandemic? Remember the French submarine fiasco, where we built a big shed for the French? Remember the PM going on holidays during a bushfire disaster, and then there being lies told about that holiday, a holiday that no-one would begrudge any Prime Minister? And just last week we found out that Ben Morton, the former member for Tangney, was appointed by the Governor-General to administer the Department of Home Affairs, and it seems that the current member for Capricornia was included in the secrecy as well. Of course, this was never made public. Even the then Minister for Home Affairs, Karen Andrews, said she knew nothing about it, although I acknowledge that she did call it out later, to her never-ending credit. Sadly, I couldn't say the same of the rest of her former cabinet colleagues. They're like cardboard in the rain: they've completely lost their structural integrity. This leads us to what this bill before the chamber, the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, is all about—ensuring that we do not see the shameful exploitation of the rules that allow a Prime Minister to secretly appoint themselves as a minister of the Crown. We're doing this because the former Prime Minister the member for Cook appointed himself to five extra portfolios. We have had other prime ministers briefly have a couple of portfolios. I know that we saw it with Whitlam and others, when they were fresh into government, but this was not one of those circumstances. We'd already had the Abbott-Turnbull conga line progression through to Morrison, the member for Cook, not an MP who I would say is blessed with lots of vision. I've seen disused service stations with more vision than the member for Cook. But he thought he needed more power. He made five self-appointments that he told no-one in his own government about, although at least two National MPs knew, after he swooped in and scuttled PEP-11. But it seems they didn't bother to tell anyone, because they were more focused on squeezing some extra stuff out of the deal for the Nationals—not the Australian people. They were just looking after themselves—reprehensible. It's almost as bad as their position on the Voice. How out of touch with the bush are these people in the Nationals? The other four ministers whom the member for Cook rode roughshod over—including his supposed best mate, the then Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg—had no idea about this set of arrangements. The fourth estate didn't know, and the Australian people didn't know. That's why this parliament needs to fix it so that it can never happen again. We need to take action to protect our valuable, precious democratic conventions. It's a very sorry day to be in parliament and have to protect our democracy in such a way in 2023. We have to ensure that the Australian public are able to access information related to the composition of the federal Executive Council. It's bizarre that we're doing it, I know, for those listening—that we have to protect our democracy. This is how bizarre the circumstances that befall us because of the actions of the member for Cook are. Those appointed to administer certain departments of state and the high offices that ministers of state hold should all be public. It's with some reflection that I think of the actions that have been taken since. I will detail them. We had the Solicitor-General's advice that what had occurred was incorrect—no surprises there. We had Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Attorney-General establish an inquiry into the appointment of the former Prime Minister to administer multiple departments, led by former High Court justice the Hon. Virginia Bell AC, a very well-respected legal mind. Those opposite moaned that this was nothing more than a witch-hunt or a political pointscoring exercise. Maybe that's why they're taking quorum calls throughout the day. I'm not sure. I wanted to know: how was this allowed to happen, who was involved and, most importantly, how can we stop it happening again? As I said when I started this speech, transparency and accountability were not the hallmarks of the Morrison LNP government, but they will be the hallmarks of every Labor government. If the member for Cook hadn't casually told reporters who were writing a book about him what he had done, we might well still be in the dark today. This is why the investigation was required and essential. The final report was provided to government on 25 November 2022, which now leads to where we are today. The Labor government accepted all of Ms Bell's recommendations, and the introduction of this bill is one part of meeting that commitment—debating and voting for legislation to ensure that such behaviour could never happen again. Democracy is too precious. We cannot allow our system of government, parliament and cabinet to be undermined like this ever again. We cannot have another situation where our prime minister secretly desires to be the health minister, the finance minister, the industry, science, energy and resources minister, the Treasurer and the home affairs minister. It's little wonder that trust in our democracy is at an all-time low. That is sad for most of us in this place—and I mean on both sides of the chamber—who take our role in this democratic institution very seriously and professionally. I'm proud to be a parliamentarian, and I take my duty seriously. Most of us in this place, irrespective of where we sit in the chamber, are here because we believe in the power of democracy, of representation, of this parliament and of governments to change the lives of Australians for the better. That is why most people want to be in parliament and want to work for those changes on behalf of their constituents. I've been here since 2007, and I would say all but one, two or three of the people I've met in that time—MPs and senators—have been motivated by the same thing: to help their constituents or the people they represent—if, indeed, that is what senators do. The fact that a Prime Minister of this country had such disregard for those principles was shocking. That is why it was the right thing for this parliament to censure the former Prime Minister. I noted, as earlier speakers have noted, that there was then a queue of blokes lining up to pat him on the back. Support is one thing, but brazenly pushing away any skerrick of responsibility was not the right gesture, I would suggest. The parliament and we here as representatives of the people in our communities had to stand up and say this was a serious breach of trust and must never happen again. It was a sad sight to see all of that backslapping and the congratulations after the member for Cook spoke against the censure. It just shows that they still can't see how damaging the actions of the former PM were and that they were as badly deceived by the member for Cook as the Australian people were. I know that this would never happen under our Prime Minister and our government, but who's to say that a future conservative government might not think, 'Hey, let's do it again'? So the parliament was right to censure the former Prime Minister, because this must never happen. It must not happen again, because the people who are elected to this place to represent their communities, and even more so the people who are appointed to ministries and to be prime minister of this country, need to be publicly recognised. They should have at their heart a respect for democracy and for the conventions of our system that enable ministers, governments and members to be held accountable. Specifically, this bill will require the Official Secretary to the Governor-General to publish a notifiable instrument on the Federal Register of Legislation as soon as reasonably practical in the following circumstances: when the Governor-General has chosen, summoned and sworn an executive councillor to the Federal Executive Council, or when the Governor-General has appointed an officer to administer a department of state or directed a minister of state to hold an office. It will also require notification of the revocation of any of these positions to be published. The notifiable instrument will include the name of the person, the department of state, where appropriate, and the date on which they were sworn, appointed or directed. In the case of revocations, the notifiable instrument is to include the name of the person, the name of the former office and the date that such membership appointment or direction was revoked. The notifiable instrument may also comprise a copy of an instrument issued by the Governor-General. These are the necessary steps to provide trust and accountability to the people of Australia. They need to know who ministers are. We cannot have a situation where secrecy is at the heart of appointments. The introduction of this bill shows that the Albanese government is delivering on its promise to restore trust and integrity to federal politics. The measures in the bill will help restore integrity and transparency in the process of appointing elected officials to high office and ensure that we have a system of government where there are checks and balances. Never let anyone have too much power. Never again will one person be able to garner powers without adequate and warranted accountability, both to the Australian people and, more importantly, to the Australian parliament, where their representatives sit. Lastly, as the centrepiece of returning accountability and transparency to politics at the federal level is the establishment of the powerful, transparent and independent National Anti-Corruption Commission. It's something that Labor took to the last election, something that will make sure we take another step towards restoring accountability in the Australian democratic system. I commend the legislation to the chamber. 12:11 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills After it was revealed that the former Prime Minister secretly appointed himself to five additional ministries, these matters were referred to the Solicitor-General, Dr Stephen Donaghue KC. He advised this, and it's worth quoting this statement: 'The principles of responsible government are fundamentally undermined by the actions of the former government.' It's a simple statement. It's clear, concise and simple. Three former Liberal prime ministers of Australia condemned the former Prime Minister for his conduct. (Quorum formed) That simple statement by Dr Stephen Donaghue KC was followed by condemnation of the former Prime Minister's conduct by no fewer than three former Liberal prime ministers of Australia. The former Prime Minister refuses—still—to acknowledge how his actions have diminished and impacted our democracy. This is really the fundamental point, here, because some people might ask, 'Why does this matter?' His actions do matter. They matter not only because he was prime minister at the time but also because integrity matters, because transparency matters and because trust in our democratic institutions matter. At a time not just in Australia but also globally when there is a 'trust deficit' in democracy—when democracies are under fire, under attack, both from external sources and internally, where there's disruption, disinformation and distrust of democratic governance—his actions absolutely matter. His actions have added to the diminishment of trust in our democratic system. From the position of highest office in this country, that of prime minister, that is the last thing you should be doing. You have an obligation and a responsibility not only to your fellow Australians but also to the very core of our democracy—its value. He took actions that diminished that value in the eyes of Australians. Many Australians see the struggle for democracy around the world. There are many brave people—this is not just a principle—who are protesting in the streets for their freedom, for democracy, and they are dying for those principles. We often take these matters for granted. We talk about them in the abstract. I draw a comparison: a holder of the highest office and their responsibility and obligation, and the trashing of that integrity, that trust in democracy, through their actions versus a person on the streets of Myanmar, a 20-something protester who is willing to face real bullets to stand up for democracy. Just think about that for a moment. There are tens of thousands of people standing and fighting for their freedom, and for this democracy that we sometimes take for granted. They're fighting for their fundamental rights, and they're doing so in the face of abhorrent repression. Atrocities have occurred, for example, on the streets of Myanmar. In Iran, there's a revolution for democracy driven by women, led by women—led by young women and girls in high school—who have bravely stood up against a theocratic regime and said, 'Enough!' They're willing to lose their lives for those principles. The people of Myanmar continue to experience the use of force against them—aerial bombing, the burning down of civilian homes and all manner of grave human rights violations that the military junta continue to persist in utilising against the democracy movement. These people believe in democracy. They are willing to die for it. Crimes against humanity continue against many peoples around the world. Those protesters know what we, at least, know intellectually—that democracy, the freedom that comes with it, is worth fighting for and worth dying for. Thousands have been killed for that principle. In that context, Australia is one of the world's oldest continuous and successful democracies, and as representatives of that democratic system the least we can do is stand up in solidarity with those people who do not live in a democracy, have had it taken away from them or are fighting for it. It's important that we feel compelled to hear their voices of protest. We can't shut our ears or our eyes to what is happening, and we can't take for granted the hard-fought efforts of previous generations of Australians to fight for the democracy that we benefit from today. Let's be really blunt about this: the actions of the former prime minister in that context are retrograde. They are, effectively, in the eyes of Australians, a complete diminishment of the value of our democracy by the highest office holder in the land. I mentioned the previous generations of Australians, and we often talk about many previous generations who fought, frankly, against Nazis, and fascism in World War 2, in which 40,000 Australians died. They were fighting to protect and defend Australia. They were also fighting for a better world, a world that was not overcome by totalitarian or authoritarian regimes, like the Nazis and what they represented. That's real courage and commitment to what we see potentially in our day-to-day lives. We don't think about democracy that much; it's more of an abstract principle when we talk about it. But it is very tangible and very real when you don't have it. You can touch it, when you don't have it, and you can see what you're missing, feel what you're missing. We have to ensure that the people of Australia can trust us as government officials in government and in parliament because we do have an obligation and a responsibility by virtue of the offices that we hold. By virtue of the fact that we are elected representatives to this place, we have a greater responsibility to the national interest with respect to standing up and defending our democracy, not trashing it, not diminishing it, not putting in doubt the integrity of the institutions that Australians rely on. We cannot be complacent in that respect—in fact, in the current climate that we face, with all the attempts to interfere in our system of government and in our democracy and all the attempts at disruption and disinformation, we actually have a responsibility to strengthen these institutions. We have a responsibility to protect our rule of law, to protect our democracy and to restore our international reputation for having robust democratic institutions that ensure the people of Australia can again have trust in our democratic processes. In this place we do a lot of politics, and sometimes it is quite partisan. But there is also substance and evidence to back up what I'm saying. In 2021 Australia received its worst ever corruption score, a global measurement generated by Transparency International. This score is associated with a lack of integrity. As I said, integrity is the cornerstone of any strong democratic system of government, and it's very closely connected to trust. Integrity reassures the Australian people that their government is working in everyone's best interests. For too long there was no Commonwealth agency devoted to integrity issues or to investigating possible corrupt conduct at the federal level. This gave too many freedoms and enabled the former prime minister to abuse the trust of the Australian people. The decline that we have seen, that lack of integrity and lack of trust that emanated from it, has probably been the most disturbing aspect of that debacle. Those actions weakened, undermined and completely diminished integrity in politics. Most of us here know how hard it is, when we talk to our constituents, to find a constituent that still trusts a politician. There's a lot of cynicism about politics and politicians. Well, those actions of the former Prime Minister really added fuel to that fire, didn't they? It's hard enough to gain the trust of the people we represent without the highest officeholder in the land trashing the integrity of politics. In 10 short months, I think it's clear to say, and important to note, that the Albanese Labor government is changing this. We've passed legislation in this place to create a powerful, independent and transparent national anticorruption commission—something those opposite refused to do when they were in government; they sat on it. We value transparency, accountability and promptly acting to rebuild integrity in public sector institutions, processes and officials. We need this transparency because our system of parliamentary democracy relies upon such conventions. It relies upon the Westminster system and the traditions of checks and balances, and that is what transparency and accountability are about at the highest levels of government—rebuilding trust, something the Morrison government did not champion. In conclusion, we should never take our democracy for granted. We should never take trust in our institutions for granted. There are people who are fighting and dying around the world for those principles, for democracy—something that we enjoy here in Australia. The former Prime Minister's actions diminished integrity and trust in our system. That's why we are taking action. Debate adjourned. Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Amendment Bill 2022 30

Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Amendment Bill 2022

Consideration of Senate Message 30 12:27 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That the amendments be agreed to. Question agreed to. National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Data Streamlining) Amendment Bill 2023 32

National Vocational Education and Training Regulator (Data Streamlining) Amendment Bill 2023

Report from Federation Chamber 32 Third Reading 32 12:28 Mr O'CONNOR 00AN3 Gorton by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2023 32

Therapeutic Goods Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2023

Assent 32 Education Legislation Amendment (Startup Year and Other Measures) Bill 2023 32

Education Legislation Amendment (Startup Year and Other Measures) Bill 2023

Report from Federation Chamber 32 Second Reading 32 12:34 The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the amendment be disagreed to.  

The House divided. [12:34]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

 75 AYES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Byrnes, A. J. Chandler-Mather, M. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Conroy, P. M. Daniel, Z. Dreyfus, M. A. Elliot, M. J. Fernando, C. Freelander, M. R. Garland, C. M. L. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gorman, P. Gosling, L. J. Hill, J. C. Husic, E. N. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Connor, B. P. J. Payne, A. E. Perrett, G. D. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Ryan, J. C. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Scrymgour, M. R. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Swanson, M. J. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Tink, K. J. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 57 NOES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Broadbent, R. E. Buchholz, S. Chaney, K. E. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Fletcher, P. W. Gee, A. R. Gillespie, D. A. Goodenough, I. R. Haines, H. M. Hamilton, G. R. Hastie, A. W. Hawke, A. G. Hogan, K. J. Howarth, L. R. Joyce, B. T. G. Landry, M. L. Le, D. Leeser, J. Ley, S. P. Littleproud, D. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. Morrison, S. J. O'Brien, E. L. Pasin, A. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Robert, S. R. Spender, A. M. Steggall, Z. Sukkar, M. S. Tehan, D. T. Thompson, P. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Wilkie, A. D. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Young, T. J. 0 PAIRS

Question agreed to.
Original question agreed to.
Bill read a second time.
Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced.

 Consideration in Detail 34 12:40 Dr SCAMPS 299623 Mackellar by leave—I move amendments (1) to (93) as circulated in my name together: (1) Schedule 1, heading to Part 1, page 3 (line 2), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (2) Schedule 1, item 2, page 3 (line 8), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (3) Schedule 1, item 3, page 3 (line 11), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (4) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 15), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (5) Schedule 1, item 4, page 3 (line 22), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (6) Schedule 1, item 20, page 7 (line 12), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (7) Schedule 1, item 21, page 7 (line 16), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (8) Schedule 1, item 25, page 8 (line 23), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (9) Schedule 1, item 25, page 8 (line 26), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (10) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 2), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (11) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 11), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (12) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 12), omit "*SY-HELP assistance", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP assistance". (13) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (lines 12 and 13), omit "SY-HELP Guidelines", substitute "STARTUP-HELP Guidelines". (14) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 15), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (15) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 17), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (16) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 18), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (17) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 19), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (18) Schedule 1, item 25, page 9 (line 20), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (19) Schedule 1, item 25, page 10 (line 4), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (20) Schedule 1, item 25, page 10 (line 22), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (21) Schedule 1, item 25, page 10 (line 26), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (22) Schedule 1, item 25, page 11 (line 26), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (23) Schedule 1, item 25, page 11 (line 28), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (24) Schedule 1, item 25, page 12 (line 6), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (25) Schedule 1, item 25, page 12 (line 10), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (26) Schedule 1, item 25, page 12 (line 14), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (27) Schedule 1, item 25, page 12 (line 22), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (28) Schedule 1, item 25, page 13 (line 5), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (29) Schedule 1, item 25, page 13 (line 31), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (30) Schedule 1, item 25, page 14 (line 12), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (31) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 14), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (32) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 15), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (33) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 17), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (34) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 19), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (35) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 20), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (36) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 21), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (37) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 25), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (38) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 27), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (39) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 29), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (40) Schedule 1, item 25, page 16 (line 31), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (41) Schedule 1, item 25, page 17 (line 9), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (42) Schedule 1, item 25, page 17 (line 27), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (43) Schedule 1, item 25, page 18 (line 2), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (44) Schedule 1, item 25, page 18 (line 6), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (45) Schedule 1, item 25, page 18 (line 10), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (46) Schedule 1, item 25, page 18 (line 12), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (47) Schedule 1, item 25, page 18 (line 23), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (48) Schedule 1, item 25, page 19 (line 1), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (49) Schedule 1, item 25, page 19 (line 3), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (50) Schedule 1, item 25, page 19 (line 6), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (51) Schedule 1, item 25, page 19 (line 19), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (52) Schedule 1, item 25, page 20 (line 29), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (53) Schedule 1, item 25, page 21 (line 18), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (54) Schedule 1, item 25, page 21 (line 19), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (55) Schedule 1, item 25, page 21 (line 24), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (56) Schedule 1, item 25, page 22 (line 1), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (57) Schedule 1, item 25, page 22 (line 3), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (58) Schedule 1, item 25, page 22 (line 11), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (59) Schedule 1, item 25, page 22 (line 12), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (60) Schedule 1, item 25, page 22 (line 15), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (61) Schedule 1, item 25, page 22 (line 20), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (62) Schedule 1, item 25, page 22 (line 22), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (63) Schedule 1, item 26, page 22 (line 28), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (64) Schedule 1, item 27, page 22 (line 31), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (65) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 3), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (66) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 4), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (67) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 11), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (68) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 12), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (69) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 13), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (70) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 14), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (71) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 18), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (72) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 19), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (73) Schedule 1, item 28, page 23 (line 20), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (74) Schedule 1, item 29, page 23 (line 26), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (75) Schedule 1, item 31, page 24 (line 6), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (76) Schedule 1, item 34, page 24 (line 15), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (77) Schedule 1, item 50, page 28 (line 14), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (78) Schedule 1, item 60, page 29 (line 26), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (79) Schedule 1, item 60, page 30 (line 7), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (80) Schedule 1, item 61, page 30 (line 19), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (81) Schedule 1, item 62, page 30 (line 22), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (82) Schedule 1, item 62, page 31 (line 1), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (83) Schedule 1, item 62, page 31 (line 3), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (84) Schedule 1, item 65, page 32 (table item 7A), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (85) Schedule 1, item 73, page 33 (line 28), omit "*SY-HELP", substitute "*STARTUP-HELP". (86) Schedule 1, page 34 (after line 4), after item 73, insert: 73A Subclause 1(1) of Schedule 1 Insert: STARTUP-HELP assistance means assistance payable under Part 3-7. STARTUP-HELP debt has the meaning given by section 137-17. (87) Schedule 1, item 75, page 34 (lines 10 to 13), omit the item. (88) Schedule 1, item 77, page 35 (after line 6), after the definition of accelerator program course, insert: STARTUP-HELP assistance has the same meaning as in the Higher Education Support Act 2003. (89) Schedule 1, item 77, page 35 (lines 7 and 8), omit the definition of SY-HELP assistance. (90) Schedule 1, item 78, page 35 (line 13), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (91) Schedule 1, item 82, page 36 (line 1), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (92) Schedule 1, item 88, page 37 (line 3), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". (93) Schedule 1, item 93, page 38 (line 2), omit "SY-HELP", substitute "STARTUP-HELP". I rise today with a small but important amendment to the Education Legislation Amendment (Startup Year and Other Measures) Bill 2023. One of the important objectives of this bill is to create a new form of higher education loan program or HELP assistance, currently known in the bill as the SY-HELP loans—SY for 'startup year'. These loans will help students build skills in an area of great importance to Australia and its future prosperity. The loans will support the participation of final year undergraduate students, current postgrad students and recent graduates in accelerator program courses at Australian universities and Australian colleges. Hopefully they will be successful and go on to become as well known as HECS-HELP and FEE-HELP. I think the understanding of what these loans are for will be improved by having a name which more directly references the kinds of courses for which they will be available. My amendment proposes that the loans currently referred to in the bill as 'SY-HELP' be termed 'Start-up-HELP.' This will make clear at a glance what the loans refer to and help make accessing these loans more user friendly. I have discussed these changes with the government, and I understand that they will support this amendment, which will make it easier for students interested in undertaking startup year programs. I commend the amendment to the House. 12:42 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank the member for Mackellar for bringing forward this amendment. It's a simple one, but I think it's a very practical one as well and the government will support it. We want these loans to be as easy to understand as possible and the member for Mackellar's amendment helps with that. As I said, it's a very simple and practical amendment and we will support it. Maybe if I can flag in the House, as I did in main committee in wrapping up that debate last night, that, in conversations with the shadow minister for education, we've agreed that this bill should be the subject of a Senate inquiry that might take place over April while the parliament is in recess. We look forward to that to see whether there are any other practical amendments which might even further improve the bill. I thank the member for Mackellar for bringing this before the House. 12:43 Mr HUSIC 91219 Chifley I just want to express, obviously, support for this. I think there is a great opportunity for us, in terms of the bill as a whole, to send a very important signal in terms of us tapping into the ideas of young Australians to build new businesses. We need to build new businesses. We need to send a signal from government that entrepreneurism and that activity is really important. I'm grateful for the opportunity, Minister for Education, to speak, because I know that there are some members of the crossbench who also think about who builds those businesses. We want to get a wider range of people building those businesses—in particular I note the presence of the member for Goldstein; we spoke about this in the National Reconstruction Fund—particularly female founders, people from under-represented groups and people from groups beyond city boundaries who are able to use that network, the architecture of regionally based universities, to do that and create businesses in our regions as well. And I note the member for Forrest's presence here as well and I know you're focused on it. Being able to send a clear intent in the title, being able to match that up with what we're doing in this bill and being able to, potentially, be able to create 2,000 new, young firms that are injecting business dynamism in the Australian economy is something that I think we should all be able to agree upon. I'm very grateful for the amendment put forward and the fact that we are very focused on sending the signal that young Australian's ideas and know-how matter. Creating firms that will create good jobs and being able to call up people from all corners to do so is a great thing. I want to express my support for the amendment. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 The question is that the amendments be agreed to. Question agreed to. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question now is that this bill, as amended, be agreed to. Question agreed to. Bill, as amended, agreed to. Third Reading 37 12:45 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland 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 37

Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading 37 12:46 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair When I heard that the former Prime Minister the member for Cook did what he did in terms of his executive positions, I thought back to Sir Henry Parkes, who of course was the Premier of the Colony of New South Wales on multiple occasions and who is known as the Father of Federation. His great Tenterfield School of Arts speech was where he really set the platform for conventions that would take place across a number of years before we got to the point in January 1901 when we became a federation. Sir Henry Parkes said this, and I think it's relevant to this particular debate today: I believe that the time has come, and if two Governments set an example, the others must soon of necessity follow. There will be an uprising in this fair land of a goodly fabric of free Government, and all great national questions of magnitude affecting the welfare of the colonies will be disposed of by a fully authorised constitutional authority. This means a distinct executive and a distinct parliamentary power for the whole of Australia, and it means a Parliament of two Houses, a House of Commons and a Senate, which will legislate on these great subjects. So Henry Parkes understood it. He understood the idea of a parliament for the whole of the country. He called it a House of Commons. We call it a House of Representatives, as per the American system. But he got it and the idea that the states would be represented in a senate. He understood the fact that there would be a constitution that would establish the parliament and establish the country and establish the executive, and that the monarch and the monarch's representative would be referred to the Governor-General. He got the idea of a distinct executive. Those were his words, 'a distinct executive'. What we saw by the member for Cook as Prime Minister was a muddling of that distinct executive, so we didn't know who was accountable. And not only did the public not know, his ministers didn't know, his caucus didn't know and the opposition didn't know. So that distinct executive that Sir Henry Parkes talked about was dishonoured. He utterly dishonoured a distinct constitutional authority and that we have a constitution in this country. I wondered what people like George Reid, a Conservative prime minister, a former governor of New South Wales, would have thought; what Edmund Barton would have thought; or Alfred Deakin would have thought about that. It's important in the establishment of our constitutional system of government. I learned, when I was at the University of Queensland studying law all those years ago, that our system of government is not just about the Constitution but about the principles of constitutionalism, where there is a separation of powers in a Westminster system of government. In some respects, it's a Washminster system, with a Senate rather than a House of Lords, but the executive must be accountable to the parliament. That means that the parliament must know who's serving in distinct offices, that there must be a distinct executive, to pick up Sir Henry Parkes's words. We didn't know that. The public didn't know that. The government didn't know it. The member for Cook kept that secret. Democracy is a fragile thing. I come from the state of Queensland, where, growing up, at times it was a bit like a hillbilly dictatorship, where one political party could get elected with 18 per cent of the vote and form a majority in the Queensland Legislative Assembly, where ministers in the executive had conflicts of interest and decided on issues of mining leasing when they themselves had shares in those companies. A Premier could arrange a voting system in a gerrymandered way to make sure not only that the Labor Party was disadvantaged but also that the Liberal Party was disadvantaged. Representative democracy was trashed. Sir Henry Parkes talked about the idea of a house, this place, that was representative of the people, and a Senate, the other place, that was representative of the states. We are fortunate that the forefathers of this country decided that we wouldn't have a House of Lords, a sort of bunyip dictatorship or aristocracy, but we would have a parliament. This legislation, tragically, is a necessity because the member for Cook didn't listen to Henry Parkes, Alfred Deakin, Edmund Barton or even the great Labor hero Andrew Fisher, one of the early prime ministers. I wonder what those prime ministers who served in office in the first two decades of our Federation would have thought about a Prime Minister, 100 years later, confusing the public. They had a Minister for the Navy, a Postmaster-General and an Attorney-General. They had these types of distinct ministerial positions. There were fewer, because our country is more complex now and it's a lot bigger in population. The NBN, the internet and TV weren't known to Andrew Fisher when he was growing up, when he came from Gympie as the member for Wide Bay. He wouldn't have understood about them. It would have been science fiction to him. But the principles of 100 years ago or more still apply. In the last few years, in countries that we honour and believe are our allies and friends and that we identify with, like the United States of America, Brazil, and other places, we've seen people take peaceful protest to the point where it's almost armed insurrection. The legislation that we have before the chamber today is absolutely vital because of what the member for Cook did. I never thought I would see a prime minister do that. I never thought I'd see a prime minister appoint himself to a variety of different ministerial posts without it being published. I wonder what the former member for Kooyong really thinks in his heart of hearts about the fact that the former Prime Minister was appointed to the Treasury in his place, when they were bunking together in the Lodge during COVID. The former Prime Minister did not tell him, his good friend and political ally, that he was actually in the same role as him. When we were asking questions of the Treasurer or the Minister for Home Affairs in the last parliament, when we sat on that side of the chamber, we could have been asking them of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister didn't tell anyone. It's no good the member for Cook saying: 'You never asked me. No-one ever asked me. Therefore I didn't tell.' That's just not good enough. I mean, seriously, what sort of insult is that to the intelligence of not just this chamber but his colleagues? I can't believe how disrespectful he was to his own ministerial colleagues and to his own caucus. I am absolutely convinced that, if he'd told his colleagues about what he had done in appointing himself to all those portfolios, without them knowing whatsoever, he would not have been the Prime Minister within 24 or 48 hours. They would have simply shunted him off. I'm convinced there would have been a special caucus meeting of the Liberal Party, and he would have been replaced either by the member for Kooyong or by the member for Dickson. I'm sure that would have been the case. But he didn't tell anyone about that. We've got legislation here that has come about through the advice of the Solicitor-General and of an eminent former justice of the High Court of Australia. It really is sad that we've had to bring this legislation before the chamber, and that we have to make sure that when you're appointed to a ministerial post it's actually published so the public can know. What possessed the member for Cook to think this? He got elected by the public in that area of the shire; they voted for him. You would think that at some level he respected democracy or the democratic process. To think he could come into this place, sit in that chair and in that office, and not tell anyone that he'd done this is just astounding. And then he appointed other people, like the member for Capricornia and his good mate the member for Tangney, into roles as well. At the time they were assistant ministers. There was an assistant minister getting responsibility for one of the most important portfolios, Home Affairs. I wonder what the member for McPherson really thought? I'll give her her due: she's been very clear and very succinct about what she thought in some respects. I would have been furious with the member for Cook. And it's hard to believe that the former member for Tangney—we've got a good member for Tangney now—wouldn't have understood. Wouldn't you have thought that Ben Morton would have rung up and said: 'By the way, Karen, I just got appointed to this role. Is there any brief you'd like me to do? Perhaps I can approve a few visas while I go.' But it never happened. Ms Swanson 264170 A one million backlog— Mr NEUMANN HVO That's right. There was a backlog of one million; that's a lot of backlog. If they'd appointed three or four people to get through the visa backlog that would have been a good thing, but they didn't do it at all. The excuse of the member for Cook was that, somehow, he wanted to appoint himself for COVID reasons. It would have taken a couple of minutes to appoint a new minister! The other excuse I heard him say was that it was because he couldn't trust the member for Hinkler—I think that's who it was—with a decision he might make in terms of resources and the environment. Honestly, how much faith did the member for Cook have in his National Party colleagues that he couldn't trust him to do that? It's just amazing that in 2022, 2021 and 2020 he was doing all this stuff. Sometimes governments use all manner of excuses during emergencies to avoid democratic accountability and transparency, but this takes the level of hypocrisy, secrecy and covert operations to an astronomical level. It was a sad day for Australian democracy when we had a censure motion in this chamber in relation to the conduct of the member for Cook, not because we had to do it but because he put himself in a position where it was so important to say to this place that representatives who are elected by their constituencies can have a say. It was important to say to the member for Cook, 'What you did was not on.' I couldn't believe it when those opposite were going up to him and kissing the ring—almost kissing the hand—after that particular vote, instead of saying: 'Look, you did the wrong thing. Own up and confess.' The fact that he didn't cooperate with the Bell inquiry, except through his lawyers—he had to lawyer up—is an indication there was a challenge. Power can be abused, and it was being abused with those appointments. And it should never have been abused. We need to know who's appointed to administer departments of state. It's not a hard thing; we get that. We're entitled to know who's in government and who's not in government. The public, who go to the ballot box, do the pre-poll and do the postal votes, are entitled to know as well. It's a simple process. I can't believe that we learnt all about this through the good efforts of a journalist—and I give credit to the journalist involved. But we learnt about this because the Prime Minister decided to cooperate in the writing of a book. It's about the folly of a criminal who gets caught because they're bragging on the mobile phone. They get their mobile phone and start bragging about something. It's the stupidity of the person who's a criminal who gets caught that way. And he's decided to reveal all and get his story out. He told the journalist about it and so a book's been written about it. He thought that was the appropriate way to reveal information. When the information came out that way and was published in the media, he thought, 'Oh, I'm going to take umbrage at this.' I listened to his press conference and I listened to that speech that day, and he still doesn't get it, at all. There's no admission of responsibility; there's no bearing of that responsibility. I say this to the member for Cook: you need to bear fruit that befits repentance, to use a good biblical saying. You need to say, 'I made a mistake. I did the wrong thing and I need to improve'. This legislation is important because of what the member for Cook did. It's sad we've got to do it, but it's a matter of necessity and I support it. 13:01 Mr LIM 300130 Tangney I rise today to speak to a great matter. I take no enjoyment in speaking to this, but it is important to do so. Our job is not about doing what is easy. It's about doing what is right. It is a deep honour to be in this place, to represent the people of Australia. This privilege also comes with great responsibilities—responsibilities that I do not take lightly. The Australian people rightfully expect a standard of behaviour from their parliamentarians. They rightfully demand that their leaders do the right things. As the government we set an example. We set a standard. The member for Cook, while Prime Minister, failed to meet the standard befitting an Australian parliamentarian. While Prime Minister of Australia, the member for Cook appointed himself to administer five additional departments. The then Prime Minister failed to inform the cabinet. The then Prime Minister failed to inform the House of Representatives. The then Prime Minister failed to inform the Australian public. In fact, the Australian public only became aware of these appointments after they were revealed by the media. This secrecy is unconscionable. It is hard to fathom that this took place in Australia, one of the guiding lights of democracy in the world. The words from the Solicitor-General are damning. The Solicitor-General found that the principles of responsible government had been 'fundamentally undermined'. The Solicitor-General also found: … it is impossible for Parliament to hold Ministers to account for the administration of departments if it does not know which Ministers are responsible for which departments. Nothing can survive in darkness and we need light to prosper. The findings of the Solicitor-General made it clear that a thorough inquiry was needed. This inquiry was led by Ms Virginia Bell AC. Ms Bell confirmed the Solicitor-General's view that the principles of responsible government were 'fundamentally undermined'. Ms Bell found that the appointments were unnecessary. Ms Bell found that these appointments were made because the former Prime Minister was concerned that an incumbent minister might exercise his or her statutory powers in a manner with which Mr Morrison did not agree. This is not the spirit of democracy. This is not the Australian way, to override someone because they make a decision that you do not like. I have three children. One day, when my children were little, four years old, they were playing in another room. They were carrying on, you know, being silly, being kids. My wife and I heard something smash, something fragile hitting the floor and breaking. I went into the next room. I saw a vase in pieces on the floor. I saw three very sheepish children looking at me. I asked my kids, 'Did someone break the vase?' All my children shook their heads and did not look into my eyes anymore. So, I got down onto their level, on one knee, and I asked again, very calmly and gently, 'Did someone break the vase?' One of my kids slowly put up their hand. I thanked them for being so honest and truthful. Then I told my kids: 'You know there is no shame in making mistakes. We all make mistakes. That is what makes us human. What is unacceptable is being dishonest about the mistake you have made.' I taught my kids that it is not acceptable to make excuses. I taught them that we must take responsibility for our actions. My children had learnt that lesson by the age of four. Imagine my disdain when the member for Cook failed to take responsibility for his underhanded actions as the then Prime Minister? The member for Cook blamed the media. He blamed this House. He blamed this parliament. This is not acceptable. I would not accept this from my children when they broke that vase all those years ago. I won't accept it now. The member for Cook said that, if people had asked, he would have answered. This erosion of transparency is a slippery slope. It's like rain that leads to a landslide. As a police officer, I saw the consequences of the abuse of power. I saw the real risk of an insidious lack of integrity. As parliamentarians, we take an oath to represent and protect our communities. We must be trusted to govern with probity, to be responsible custodians. We must be held to account for our actions. The foundations of our democratic institutions depend on it. The actions of the member for Cook diminished the Australian government on the world stage, and, more importantly, in the eyes of the Australian public. We need to restore the public's faith in elected officials. This bill shows that the government is delivering on its promises to restore the Australian people's confidence in our federal system of government. I welcome the implementation of the first six recommendations from the Bell inquiry. Our democracy is precious. We must protect it together. 13:09 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson At the last election I was humbled and honoured to win my seat of Paterson and get the vote from the majority of people for a third time. It really is an incredible honour, something that I never forget about and something that I think about often. It was a brutal campaign. I was up against a tough opponent who was cashed up. She had been on the ground for 12 months offering up more of the same. There were a lot of promises, a lot of criticisms of Albo and of me, a lot of TV ads and a sea of corflutes—not to mention many visits by the Prime Minister to either my seat or, more broadly, my region of the Hunter. What there wasn't was a commitment to a national integrity commission. There wasn't a commitment to take responsibility or change the ways of the Morrison government. There wasn't a commitment to be a better government. When I look back on that, it was such an incredible hint at what was really going on behind closed doors. But what excited me about the campaign was that there were many new constituents. My area had become somewhat of a safe place for people who knew that they didn't want to live in close quarters in Sydney and some of our bigger cities any longer. They took the opportunity to be able to work from home to move to the regions. I thought that was a fantastic thing. I love meeting them and talking to them. Many of them were incredibly surprised at how much the regions had to offer them: the space, the air, the environment, the opportunity and the good jobs. It really was such an incredible experience for so many people. There was better housing affordability, a better lifestyle and the natural beauty. I can distinctly remember one lady who I spoke to, and she said: 'I never in a million years thought I would look out of my kitchen window and see cows. I cannot tell you what a difference that has made to my outlook on life.' Isn't it funny that it's the things we often take for granted that can make such a pivotal difference. What worried me though was long-term residents, who were concerned about many newcomers—not the people themselves but the pressure that they put on things like roads and infrastructure. They were worried about not being able to get into the doctor, the dentist or the vet. Even the local mechanic had a big queue. The roads were more congested, and even parking was becoming an issue in some towns where, truly, it had never been a problem. The world seemed to be changing so rapidly after COVID, and those people felt the former government just wasn't keeping up. That government at that time, of course, was changed because people had that sense that, whilst they had done a reasonable job during the pandemic, they had slid so far between the pandemic and that election. Everyone noticed that the cost of living was increasing and interest rates were rising. They were waking up to the fact that the trickle-down economy was really only working for the very wealthy. Retirees and young people alike were worried about their futures. They were sick of being told to get a job or get a better job; to stop renting and buy a house; and that climate change wasn't really a thing they should worry about. They were being told that our goals were being met at a canter. They were indirectly being told by their Prime Minister, 'I don't hold a hose, mate.' They were being told that international relations broadly didn't matter unless you were swapping red caps. They were being told 'how good' everything was. However, people simply weren't buying it. Mr Morrison had exposed himself as not the daggy dad that everyone had wanted to embrace and just a knockabout good fellow but as someone who was of a much different character. That worried people. It was as if the daggy dad, when scratched a little deeper, had a darker side. They were very worried about that, and they were worried about the lack of substance. He was also showing his incompetence, and he was starting to show his true character. Sadly, for him, Australians just didn't like what they saw. In this business you do have to have a thick skin. You can't take things too personally. It is difficult. I will never get used to people saying to me, 'Oh, you politicians are all alike.' That's actually not the case; we are not all alike. Not everyone is in it for themselves, and we do want to make a difference. I think it upsets me because it is just so wrong. I am privileged to work with some of the most dedicated, hardworking people in this place that I have ever worked with across my working life. Emma McBride, the member for Dobell, is a wonderful example of this. As, indeed, are the member for Fremantle and the member for Bean, who joins me in the— Ms SWANSON 264170 I'm just getting to that, Member for Fisher. We all come from different places across this country and some of the most dedicated, hardworking people come from all of the parties in this place. We come to this place to make a difference at your place, at home, and we want to represent our homes as best we can. It is an extraordinary opportunity to get to this place. As the great philosopher himself, John Denver, said, 'Some days are diamonds, and some days are stones.' But when you get something great over the line, like turning your local little airport in Newcastle into a serious international airport, with all the jobs and opportunities it brings, that's pretty amazing. I do want to reference the member for—I'm struggling with Mr Michael McCormack's seat. Isn't it terrible that I can't think of it! Mr Wallace 265967 Riverina. Ms SWANSON 264170 Of course! The member for Riverina! All I could think was 'Wagga'. I want to pick up on that. I do want to specifically mention the member for Riverina when I talk about the Newcastle Airport because, in achieving the Newcastle Airport becoming an international airport, I do have to a debt of gratitude to the member for Riverina because he was most helpful. And that underlines what I said a moment ago: there are good people in this place, from all sides, who come here to make a real difference. We can work together, and we do work together, to make things better. I do cite that important example of making the Newcastle Airport an international airport, and I thank the member for Riverina for helping me do that in my previous term, when I was in opposition and he was in government. It is pretty amazing when you can get those things across the line. However, there are a few in this place—and thankfully only a few—who take the opportunity to enhance themselves before their community and forget the role we are here to perform as elected representatives. The backroom manoeuvring, the shady number deals, the promises of promotion become the focus of these Machiavellian imposters. Sadly, we did see our former Prime Minister move his way into his party by killing off his local opponent in a preselection in one of the most unethical ways that many people said they'd ever seen. We saw him make his way to the ministry, wreaking havoc through human services and terrorising the immigration sector. He made his way into the powerful role of Treasurer. And we all remember the member for Cook putting his arm around the then Prime Minister, the Hon. Malcolm Turnbull, and stating that he was 'ambitious for him'. We all know how that turned out. We also know that no one man can find himself in the Prime Minister's office without the support of his colleagues. Some of the faithful servants of the previous Prime Minister remain in this place. The former member for Tangney was not so fortunate to remain in this place. He paid the ultimate price. The people of Tangney had had enough. The problem for the member for Cook is that the former member of Tangney will continue to be one of his closest allies. Some of the people that remain in this House must still have some mistrust. Sadly, when you appoint yourself to multiple roles under the cover of darkness that is what really causes distrust. Sadly, the Morrison government was all about the lights, the clicks, the stunts. It is novel, but, let me tell you, this place isn't a game. Whilst we all occasionally ham it up for the cameras, and we all take social media to the next level, this is a serious business and it should be treated as such. The lives of Australians deserve the same gravitas that we like to think we give ourselves in this place. Each and every one of us makes decisions, creates policies, votes on legislation and takes on responsibilities that affect the lives of the Australian people. That is what we are here for and it is what we should be doing. Good government is what is expected by the Australian people, and when the government is failing them all the social media in the world means nought when your people are hurting. It is often said that governments lose elections and oppositions do not win. That certainly has credibility. The last election came down to trust, and the people made it clear that they could no longer trust Mr Morrison. He had lied to them once too often, promised a future that only served a few and was embarrassing our nation across the world. When the President of France confirmed that the former Prime Minister lied to him, and that he knew it, there was no doubt that Australia was no longer a country that could be relied upon. There was no trust. That is a terrible indictment on us. The now elected Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese, I'm pleased to say, is the opposite. No matter how busy his schedule, he is back home in Grayndler as much as he can be. He knows what's happening in his patch, and he is always working for it. He has a strong sense of loyalty and is a man of his word. He's articulate. He's not a code-hopper; he's backed the same team all his life. He never forgets why he is here and why we are all here. He is a man of integrity, and his leadership team—the Deputy Minister, Richard Marles, and the Senate team, led by Penny Wong and Don Farrell—are people of integrity. Our Treasurer is an experienced economist, with the credentials to back it up. The Attorney-General—well, let's just say: national integrity commission, done! As I stated before, this is a tough business. They say, 'If you want a friend in politics, get a dog.' This hasn't been my experience in the Labor caucus. I've forged real friendships based on mutual interest and respect, and I know my leader is always honest with me. I don't know how you do this job when you can't trust your boss to be frank with you. The remaining members of the coalition that now sit opposite me could not trust their boss. Rumours of bullying and deception travelled these corridors on a daily basis. The country was not being governed; it was barely being managed, to be frank with you. The icing on the cake, the finding of the Solicitor-General, made it clear that an inquiry into the member for Cook's conduct was overdue. Let me repeat that—an inquiry into the former Prime Minister's conduct. It was an extraordinary time. The advice of the Solicitor-General was damning. Between March 2020 and May 2021, the member was Cook was appointed by the Governor-General to administer no less than five departments: Health; Finance; Industry, Science, Energy and Resources; Treasury; and Home Affairs. These are your big-ticket items here in parliament, and the actual ministers appointed had no idea—not a clue. His cabinet had no idea. It turns out the former member for Tangney knew; he got the secret prize of Home Affairs. Who else that remains in this place knew that the leader of the coalition was misleading his cabinet, misleading his party room and, most importantly, misleading the Australian people? He said that it was because of the extraordinary times and that the pandemic created the obstacles where, indeed, this was justified. I say to you: there are no circumstances that justify deception. They were indeed extraordinary times, and if indeed it was so necessary for him to take on those additional roles the people of Australia would have understood. He should have been straight with us. He should have been straight with his own people. Sadly, that was not the case. Debate adjourned. Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2023 42

Work Health and Safety Amendment Bill 2023

Assent 42 DOCUMENTS 42 DOCUMENTS Hillsong Church 42 Presentation 42 13:25 Mr WILKIE C2T Clark by leave—I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following documents presented by the Member for Clark in the Federation Chamber on 9 March 2023 being withdrawn and the Member for Clark presenting a replacement version of those documents containing redactions: (1) Introductory and summary 3 Whistleblower disclosure Hillsong Church Australia Group; (2) Where all the money really goes 1 Whistleblower disclosure Hillsong Church Australia Group; (3) Where all the money really goes 2 Whistleblower disclosure Hillsong Church Australia Group; and (4) Hillsong Australia's payments overseas and overseas activities Whistleblower disclosure Hillsong Church Australia Group. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 74046 Is there a seconder for the motion? Ms Sharkie 265980 I second the motion and reserve my right to speak. Question agreed to. Mr WILKIE C2T I table the documents. BILLS 43 BILLS Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 43

Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading 43 13:26 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell I rise to speak in support of the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022, and I do so because I believe a primary role of this parliament and of government is to be accountable, transparent and honest with the people we are elected to serve. It might once have been fair to assume that the amendment before us would not be necessary. Those who drafted the original legislation would probably have never imagined the need to spell out the requirement for formal notification of any changes to the Federal Executive Council. Ministerial responsibility for crucial areas of public policy and administration is usually something that is universally understood as a matter of importance and in the public interest to know. But these so-called shared assumptions about how democratic governments are meant to function were suddenly no longer shared under the previous government, as we have seen and discovered. What we now know is that because of the actions of the member for Cook in the dying days of the government he led, this amendment is now indeed necessary. As we know, the member for Cook had himself installed as the minister for five departments, without bothering to tell the nation what he was doing—nor his ministerial colleagues, for that matter. It would seem that he didn't even bother to tell the sworn ministers that he had taken over their portfolios. Apparently being the Prime Minister and being responsible for administering the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet wasn't enough for him. He decided to also avail himself and appoint himself as minister for health, finance, industry, science, energy and resources, the Treasury and Home Affairs. Earlier this year, the Edelman Trust survey revealed that Australians have an alarmingly reduced level of trust in their governments. According to this annual survey, the level of trust Australians had in government had dropped quite significantly on the international trustworthiness index and was now below 50 per cent. It's no wonder that the Australian people have trouble trusting government, when the leader of the previous government clearly couldn't even trust his own ministers—so much so, that he decided to do their jobs form them. This amendment is necessary, because we need to rebuild trust in the integrity of government. There are many ways we can do this. We can do it by keeping our promises; by being honest and open about the challenges we face; through maintaining a practical commitment to fairness and equity in our policies and programs; through encouraging frank and fearless advice from the public service; and through spending public money wisely and in the national interest, rather than on securing votes in marginal seats. In many, if not all, of these areas the previous government managed to slowly erode more and more of the Australian people's trust. We on this side are committed to rebuilding that trust through honest leadership and with integrity. But for now, let us focus on the issue of transparency, because that's what this amendment seeks to enshrine when it comes to ministerial responsibility. This amendment is a carefully considered response to the inquiry led by former High Court justice, the Hon. Virginia Bell. This inquiry was independent, non-political and non-partisan. The amendment is designed to reinforce the principles of responsible government. It is hard to imagine how anyone could possibly take issue with this. I want to highlight how important honesty— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The debate is now interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and, given you were interrupted, you will be given leave to resume speaking when the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 43 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Western Australia: Hospitals 43 13:30 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning The hospital system in Western Australia is in crisis. As the member for Canning, I have a duty to speak up for the people of my electorate, particularly when Labor's failure to manage the healthcare system is putting lives at risk. Today I rise for the seventh time in this place to call on the WA Premier, Mark McGowan, to do his job and fix our hospital system. First, I want to make clear that my concerns are not with our doctors, our nurses or our hospital staff. They do an incredible job, often in difficult circumstances. My concerns are with Labor's mismanagement, which is leading to bed shortages, ambulance ramping and unacceptable waiting times. Our health system is in a crisis after six years of Labor state government. I have been campaigning for years with the community for WA Labor to deliver upgrades to the Peel Health Campus, my region's primary hospital. Since speaking up, northern residents of Canning have shared their concerns about Armadale hospital. My constituents cannot wait any longer while Labor sits on its hands. It's time for the Premier, Mark McGowan, and the four state Labor MPs in the Peel region, who were elected to represent us, to fix our healthcare system. Our doctors and nurses are the best in the world, but they need resources and the system management to provide the best possible care to our community. Mark McGowan and WA Labor have let us down, and I won't stop speaking for my constituents until we see action. Vaping 44 13:31 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton A recent ANU study found that people are three times more likely to take up smoking if they've tried vaping. Three times—that's a scary number. After Labor governments have put in so much work to reduce rates of smoking, from banning advertising to plain packaging, to let vaping go unchecked now could undo a lot of that hard work. It's obvious vaping is being driven by big tobacco to try and increase smoking and drive up profits. Cynically, it's targeting young people with flavoured vapes and funky designs, such as looking like highlighters you can put in your pencil case and having unicorns on them. All sensible people know that government should do something. However, the Nationals propose letting people flog vapes in every supermarket in Australia. It's said that where there's smoke, there's fire, but where there's nicotine, there are the Nationals. The Nationals Party is still taking donations from big tobacco. Did this policy come directly from the tobacco lobbyists who want more kids hooked on their products? When Greg Hunt tried to do something to place import controls on vapes, he got rolled by those opposite, surely led by the tobacco funded Nationals. I support Minister Butler's move to work with the states to put a stop to kids taking up vaping because, unlike the Nationals, I don't want to see a rise in smoking rates and the disastrous consequences this has on the health of Australians and the pressures on our health systems. Talk to your local schools and you will find that vaping is taking place in every toilet in every school. We need to stop this. University of Canberra Sydney Hills 44 13:33 Mr HAWKE HWO Mitchell It was a great privilege to recently launch and welcome the University of Canberra Sydney Hills campus, which opened in my electorate of Mitchell. In the heart of my electorate at Castle Hill, this campus is offering state-of-the-art facilities, including study space, equipment, simulation labs and clinical training places. It is providing students with hands-on learning experience in vital fields such as nursing and health related fields, including a masters of nursing degree. This is an important facility in Western Sydney. As someone who's grown up in Western Sydney his whole life, I know we have world-class universities like the University of Western Sydney and Macquarie University. That the University of Canberra has opened a campus in my electorate and has that great offering for the enormous amount of young people coming through our schooling system is a real asset for my electorate of Mitchell. It's right next to the Metro line, which the state government invested in over many years, meaning that there are great transport links. It's well located. It has greatly experienced staff who have already set up, and it was a pleasure to meet not only the international students who have already started there but also the domestic students considering, and now studying, a career in nursing. It is the truth that, following the pandemic, the health related sectors are going to dominate our economy for some time. The health and social assistance sector is the second-largest employer in industry-terms inside my electorate. I really want to thank the University of Canberra for a great and foresighted investment in our young people with this great nursing offering in my electorate of Mitchell. Laverty, Mr Declan 44 13:34 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon On Sunday night at Darwin's Airport Tavern, 20-year-old Declan Laverty was finishing his shift when a 19-year-old customer allegedly stabbed him. Declan texted his parents, 'Love you, being stabbed,' before he died at the scene. Declan's senseless killing has rocked the Northern Territory. It is an unimaginable tragedy. No-one ever expects to go to work to face violence but many do. No-one deserves to lose their life this way. As Declan's mother said, 'He will never fall in love. He will never marry. He will never be a dad. His life, his future, our future, have been completely stripped away.' My deepest condolences to Declan's family and loved ones. As a community Darwin and Palmerston stand together to say that this violence will not be tolerated. Alcohol-fuelled violence has been and is a problem in the Northern Territory. I commend the Northern Territory government for the announced changes to bail laws and weapons offences yesterday. Improvements to security at licensed premises are essential to ensure the safety of workers. The whole Northern Territory community needs to have a serious conversation about alcohol and crime, and about how we can all work together to do our bit to keep the community safe. May Declan Laverty rest in peace. Calare Electorate: Roads 44 13:36 Mr GEE 261393 Calare Since the days of the gold rush, the communities of the Central West of New South Wales have been advocating for a new crossing over the Macquarie River at Dixons Long Point between Mudgee and Orange. At the moment it takes about two hours and 20 minutes to drive between the two, but the most direct route is via Dixons Long Point. With no crossing, the only way through is straight through the water. An improved road and crossing at Dixons Long Point would drastically reduce the travel time between Orange and Mudgee. It would provide access to vehicles all year round, withstand flood events and improve connectivity between the Central West and Hunter Valley regions, which would drive economic growth and tourism in the area. We could have used it during the recent bushfires. Substantial funding had been committed under the Roads of Strategic Importance program by the previous government. Geotech work had been carried out, and the project was even put out to tender. Together, with local Indigenous groups, we cooperatively and respectfully worked through cultural heritage concerns and addressed them to find a way forward, and there was still $27.8 million in fully allocated funding sitting there in that kitty to get the project moving. Where is it now? Why can't any of it be used? One hundred and seventy years is a long time to wait for this crossing. I urge the government to back this game-changing project for our region. Get behind Dixons Long Point. Blair Electorate: Infrastructure 45 13:37 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair This week I had the pleasure of hosting a delegation from the City of Ipswich in Southeast Queensland. They came to raise awareness of the need for a rail link between Ipswich CBD and Springfield, to the east of the fastest-growing city in Queensland. The Albanese Labor government is committing $3.4 million towards the business case. The rail corridor will service the fast-growing multicultural communities along the proposed route and ensure homes in the many greenfield sites are more affordable and attractive. It will link the Ipswich and Springfield campuses of the University of Southern Queensland and the Ipswich showgrounds. Without the rail corridor, the cost of congestion will go from $500 million to one billion dollars a year by 2036, with the average commute to Brisbane 2.5 hours. I commend the delegation, particularly Councillor Jacob Madsen, the deputy mayor of Ipswich; Councillor Sheila Ireland, who, along with Jacob, represents Division One; Dan Heenan, who looks after major projects and advocacy within the Ipswich City Council; Christine Castley, the CEO of Multicultural Australia; Taku Hashimoto from Sekisui House, a major property developer in Ripley; and Darren Zanow, the president of the Ipswich Show Society. Thank you very much for making the commitment to come to Canberra. I commend the delegation and thank my colleagues on both sides of the chamber for generously giving their time to accommodate the delegation from the City of Ipswich. North Sydney Electorate: Energy 45 13:39 Ms 300124 North Sydney TINK () (): When I was running for the seat of North Sydney, an idea emerged from our community that we could be one of the first net zero urban energy zones in the country, meaning homes across my electorate would have reduced household expenses and healthier, cleaner and environments to live in. The successful election result enabled an incredible significantly experienced volunteer team to come together to develop a fully fledged strategy and plan to assist our community in achieving and establishing this goal. To everyone involved in that team: please know that the wider community and I will be forever grateful for both your commitment and the work that you have done in this area. From that beginning, and in collaboration with North Sydney, Lane Cove, Hunters Hill and Willoughby local councils and other key stakeholders from the business, not-for-profit and community sectors, next weekend, on Sunday 2 April, we will start this important work at our first ever Clean Energy Community Fair. Taking place at Norths leagues club from 10 am, the free event will be family friendly and will include some fantastic speakers; interactive and interesting exhibitions, including electric bikes and vehicles; and even face painting for anyone who would like it. I give special thanks to the teams at Smart Energy Council, Norths leagues club and the local councils that have worked with us, hand in hand, to make this event possible. It is certain to be a fantastic day, and I look forward to seeing our community make this transition quickly. 10th Light Horse Regiment 45 13:40 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck On Sunday 12 March, I represented the Minister for Veterans' Affairs at Guildford, in my electorate of Hasluck, to commemorate the 10th Light Horse Regiment with the unveiling of an emotionally charged statue of a soldier with his trusty steed, guiding the horse through knee-deep mud. The 10th Light Horse was raised in Guildford in 1914. It was the only light horse regiment recruited in Western Australia in the First World War and became one of Australia's best known and most effective regiments. The regiment was sent to Gallipoli, via Egypt, and used mainly in a defensive role until the August offensive. We can only wonder at the bonds between the soldiers and their horses and the suffering that both endured together. The unveiling ceremony was well attended by dignitaries from the miliary, all levels of government, businesses and local residents. Guests included the Chair of the Australian War Memorial, the Hon. Kim Beazley, and even Nicholas Hasluck, the son of Sir Paul and Dame Alexandra Hasluck, for whom the electorate of Hasluck is named. I have a particular attachment to the regiment, as my own father, Peter Lawrence, who's here in the gallery today, was a member of the 10th Light Horse between 1962 and 1968. I pay my respects to all members of the regiment, both former and serving. I congratulate the artist, Dr Charles Robb, and the Guildford Light Horse Statue Committee for their efforts. I know the project went through some difficult times, but it was worth the effort. Stirling Square will now commemorate the efforts and service of our veterans, and the animals which served our nation. Coeliac Disease 46 13:42 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I give a shout-out today to all coeliacs in Australia. Coeliac disease affects approximately one in 70 Australians, making it one of the most common autoimmune diseases. It is also one of Australia's most under-recognised medical conditions. If you have coeliac disease, your immune system's response to gluten causes damage to the small intestine, causing in many cases quite serious medical conditions. My eldest daughter, Bridget, was severely anaemic before her diagnosis. The only treatment currently available is a completely gluten-free diet. This means households like ours have completely separate cooking implements and boards and have to be exceptionally vigilant so as not to contaminate a coeliac's food. Fortunately, there are now many businesses that cater for coeliacs, and I note PJ's Country Fruit & Veg in Lismore, which has a complete section of products for the coeliac community. Coeliac Australia is a charity that works to support Australians with the disease. I thank them for the work they do. Coeliac Awareness Week is 13 to 20 March this year. It aims to raise awareness about the disease itself and how often it can be undiagnosed. Bochasanwasi Shri Akshar Purushottam Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS) 46 13:43 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt BAPS is a global socio-spiritual and volunteer-driven organisation with a commitment to empowering individuals to engage in projects that improve the community, country and world. I have had the honour of being a part of BAPS activities many times, particularly with their Melbourne South branch. Most recently, I commemorated International Women's Day with them. Their women's conference, with the theme Make It Happen, served as a platform to bring women together to discuss various methods of overcoming obstacles faced during the pursuit of our goals. They organised a play that focused on ways to seize opportunities to accomplish our ambitions. One of their beautiful performances was of the twins, Sidthi and Ridthi, and how they use time differently in life. This made me reflect on my own life and how I have used my time so far on this earth to advance the cause of equity and equality. I am proud to represent organisations like BAPS as the federal member for Holt. Their vision to ensure a harmonious society by promoting their culture through volunteering and service is commendable. Thank you so much for having me and thank you for the lovely sweets. World's Greatest Shave 46 13:45 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie Today there are more than 135,000 Australians that are currently living with blood cancer, and sadly one in three of those people will have lost their cancer battle within five years of diagnosis. Blood cancers are the second most common cause of cancer death. This is why the World's Greatest Shave campaign exists, to send a powerful message of hope and relief to those affected by this terrible disease. I recently attended Grace Lutheran College in Rothwell in the Petrie electorate to attend their annual World's Greatest Shave fundraising event. Since 2009 the Grace community have raised a whopping $378,516 for the Leukaemia Foundation. Televised by Channel Nine's Today show, 42 high school students and teachers lined up on St Patrick's Day, last Friday, to shave their heads in support of those living with leukaemia, with numerous others donating a gold coin to colour their hair and local hairdressers donating their time for a worthy cause. The highest fundraisers of the day were students Fraser and Declan, who each raised over $3,000, and Nicholas, who raised over $2,000. I met a young woman, Taleah, who voluntarily cut off her lower-back-length ponytail and shaved her head. She raised over $1,600. I want to highlight Kylie Duyzer, the principal, who let me colour her hair. New South Wales State Election 46 13:46 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid There once was a premier called Perrottet. To privatise stuff was his only play. As hard as he tried, the impulse he couldn't hide, and he sold every one of our assets away. The New South Wales state election is upon us, and the choice could not be more clear. On the one hand, you have the coalition government which, after almost 12 years in power, are about as old and tired as they come. It's a coalition government which keeps the wages of our essential workers down—nurses, teachers, our ambos, the ones who got us through the pandemic. None of them deserved a pay rise, according to Premier Perrottet and his coalition government. It's a government who will, frankly, privatise anything with a pulse. Contrast that with the Minns Labor team. They will create a publicly owned clean energy corporation to expand investment in renewable energy and put downward pressure on power prices. The Minns Labor team will protect public ownership of Sydney Water and Hunter Water by putting it in the New South Wales constitution. A Minns Labor team will remove the wages cap that has kept the wages of our essential workers low for too long. The choice is clear: on Saturday, vote 1 Labor. Australian Constitution: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice 47 13:48 Mr JOYCE e5d New England We've seen the details, or some of the details because there's lots we don't see, of the Voice. But we do know it's going to differentiate people not on circumstances they find themselves in but on the race they have. Mr Rob Mitchell M3E Tell us about your coalition partnership deal. Mr JOYCE e5d Even right now we see the bullying tactics of those who oppose it, who will not actually go through the process of letting the Australian people have a proper debate. We do note that they now have reference to the executive. Of course, reference to the executive and interpretation by the High Court as to what 'consultation' means will mean the capacity for oversight of virtually all legislation. The definition of 'consultation' is something that other cabinet ministers don't have. They can't take something to the High Court because they haven't been consulted enough, but the Voice will. When the definition of the Voice happens, it will not be by the parliament and in equal proportion. It will be by the Labor Party and the Greens. They will define the Voice. Right now, we know the Solicitor-General has information and they won't release it. We hear the sort of attitude they have—the sort of belligerent attitude they have—where they will be belligerent and try to charge us with guilt and screaming, rather than in a debate. And I say this: if they don't trust you with the details, do not trust them with your vote. It is not racist to vote no, and bullying and guilt are going to be the attributes of those trying to debate this. Government members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Paterson, you have the call. New South Wales State Election 47 13:49 Ms SWANSON 264170 Paterson Thanks. I didn't hear you, Deputy Speaker, over the— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 It was quite noisy. Ms SWANSON 264170 Yes, it was. Thank you. This Saturday the people of New South Wales will go to the polls, and across the Hunter and Upper Hunter I want them to think about these names: Clayton Barr, Kate Washington, Jenny Aitchison, Sonia Hornery, Tim Crakanthorp, and Peree Watson. These are our candidates across the Hunter, and they are fighting for your schools, your hospitals and, importantly, regional roads. Kate Washington is fighting for a new high school at Medowie. Clayton Barr is fighting for a new high school at Huntlee. At Maitland Hospital, we know the wait times have been atrocious under this New South Wales government. We are fighting for more staff at Maitland Hospital. Thank you, Jenny Aitchison, for that. You wouldn't get a better local member than Sonia Hornery, and Tim Crakanthorp has fought tooth and nail for a container terminal at Newcastle port. We know that he is putting his money where his mouth is when it comes to Newcastle. Thanks for that, Tim. We have a fantastic team, but the one I want to highlight to you today belongs to the electorate of my good friend and neighbour Dan Repacholi. It's Peree Watson in the Upper Hunter. Give her your No. 1 this Saturday. She is dynamic and new. She's not tired like some of those Nationals in the Upper Hunter. Give her your vote. She'll work hard for you. Environmental Activism 47 13:51 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia Every Australian has a right to go to work and feel safe. It goes without saying that this is the expected norm for every workplace right across the country. Yet workers at the Carmichael Mine in my electorate of Capricornia have been faced with physical and verbal abuse from a group of anti-coal activists whose beliefs are of utter contempt for the laws which have upheld our great country for over a century. For 18 months these activists have been terrorising workers with physical harm while boasting online of their altercations. I wholeheartedly believe in free speech. This is what makes our country what it is, and it's something that we see in action every day in parliament. These extreme activists hold dangerous anti-government and anti-authority ideologies which are a significant threat to our society. The laws should be applied equally, without fear or favour. Extreme activists are no strangers to me. Late last year, I too was targeted by activists who are also linked to this group. At an event I was attending, these activists were verbally abusive while shaking their spears. It left me fearing not only for my safety but for the safety of my staff also. Again, in our place of work we felt fear. We felt terrorised by a group of people who show no respect for anyone's views that do not align with their own. More needs to be done by the government to hold these people accountable for their actions and ensure that people feel safe in their place of work. These people are not above the law and should be dealt with by the full force of the law. Everyone should be safe in the workplace. New South Wales State Election 48 13:52 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter On Saturday, New South Wales has a choice: a choice of a tired, old, rorting, wasting government, the government that we currently have, which Perrottet leads, or the fresh start of a Chris Minns Labor government. This is what we all want. We want a fresh start in the state. We want to make sure that we're doing best. We want teachers. We want high schools. We want nurses. We want hospitals. We want fire brigades and stations. We want ambulances. We want the support of everyone who has been rorted over the last 12 years by a wasted government. We have fantastic candidates in the Hunter. We have Clayton Barr and Sonia Hornery, two legends of the Australian Labor Party in New South Wales, and we also have two brand-new candidates for our area. We have the wonderful Peree Watson. Peree Watson is going up against a tired old Nationals Upper Hunter member in that area. He's new to the seat, but he's a bit quiet in that seat, I can tell you. Peree Watson—what an absolute legend of a lady: Peree '23. Peree will get there, and Peree will help us get over the line. Then we have our fantastic candidate Steve Ryan down at Lake Macquarie. We need Steve to push hard as he is continuing to do. I've been out doorknocking with both of these amazing candidates, and I wish them luck in the New South Wales state election. Go Labor! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Hinkler, are you seeking the call, and, my goodness, what is that? National Rugby League Pacific Showcase 48 13:54 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler I am, indeed. I have with me the inaugural NRL Pacific Showcase trophy, from the touch football game on Tuesday! It was played in very good spirits. It will go on to be an annual event. I want to give a shout-out to Jess Goddard from the NRL. It was her birthday on Tuesday and she spent it—before dawn—setting up the Senate oval so we could all have a game. JBR and the team did a fantastic job. More importantly, it was about the people-to-people links between us and our good friends in the Pacific, and continuing to build on that good faith, by a game of touch football and through sport. So a big shout-out to Petero Civoniceva—whose name I still can't pronounce correctly. Elsie Albert, who played on one of the sides, is the first Papua New Guinean to play in the NRLW, and she's a fantastic ambassador for rugby league amongst women across the country. Sia Soliola, from Samoa, is another female athlete playing in the NRLW. It's great to have her there. She had some serious wheels. To everyone who played and took part, it was a great event. But a special shout-out to the member for Nicholls, Sam Birrell, who was named player of the match. I could count the number of touch football games on one hand that he's played: State of Origin, three trials, the Pacific Showcase—I expect he'll play for Australia next. In the last couple of seconds, I give a big shout-out to Paul and Ricky, down from Bundaberg, from my electorate. Welcome to the parliament! The DEPUTY SPEAKE R: Thank you. I'll let the prop through, on this occasion. Liberal Party of Australia 48 13:56 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong This Saturday, the people of New South Wales will vote for a new government. To assist the House I thought I'd remind them of all the scandals that have riddled the current Liberal opposition, when in government, who have well passed their use-by date. You Liberals are lucky I only have 90 seconds! I simply cannot cover every scandal, every rort, that's happened over the last 12 years, so here's just a sample of scandal, an amuse-bouche of transgression, if you will. Here we go. Premiers O'Farrell and Berejiklian resigned after a scandal before ICAC. Damien Tudehope, former Liberal leader in the upper house had shares in Transurban, all of which are part of a government that privatised Sydney's roads to—you guessed it—Transurban. Dodgy Daryl Maguire was investigated by ICAC for his property dealings, charged by police for conspiracy for his part in a corrupt visa scheme. John 'Pork' Barilaro—I could spend 30 minutes on him alone. He politicised disaster funding grants excluding the fire ravaged Blue Mountains from a $100 million fund and then tried to score himself a half-a-million-dollar job to go to New York City. Liberal members of parliament Edwards, Owen, Cornwell and Webber all admitted to receiving illegal donations. We've had coalition ministers sacked from the ministry for Islamophobic and anti-vax jokes, and I could go on. New South Wales has an amazing record of booting out rotten governments—and they got it right when they kicked you lot out last year—and they're going to kick the Liberals out this year. This Saturday, vote for Lyndal Howison, Donna Davis, Chris Minns and Labor for a fresh start in New South Wales. Prime Minister 49 13:57 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer This is a dishonest prime minister who deceives the Australian people day in and day out. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Can you please withdraw that comment. Ms LEY 00AMN I've used these words before. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Can you please withdraw the comment. Ms LEY 00AMN Dishonest, deceitful, deceptive— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Are you going to defy the chair? I've asked you to withdraw. Ms LEY 00AMN I withdraw. The Prime Minister couldn't name the interest rate in April but thought he could promise Australians a cheaper mortgage in May. The Prime Minister knew there was a war in Ukraine and then promised a $275 reduction in power bills—28 times—after the invasion. And the Prime Minister promised no new taxes but broke that commitment too. How can this arrogant out-of-touch Prime Minister seriously say, 'It's been a good 10 months'? The Prime Minister is breaking promises he made hundreds of times before the last election and ramming policies through this parliament that he didn't even mention once. This is a prime minister allergic to the truth. This is not the leadership the Prime Minister promised. He said he would leave no-one behind but he's leaving everyone behind. Small businesses: left behind. Workers: left behind. Mortgage holders: left behind. Retirees: left behind. Renters: left behind. In the coalition, we are here for the small businesses of this great country and we are here for the mortgage holders in the suburbs and the regions. The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. MINISTRY 49 MINISTRY Temporary Arrangements 49 13:59 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I inform the House that of the Minister for Government Services will be absent from question time today and the Minister for Social Services will answer questions on his behalf. I also inform the House that the Minister for Home Affairs will be absent from question time today and the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs will answer questions on her behalf. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 49 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Energy 49 13:59 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson My question is to the Prime Minister. On 15 occasions in this parliament, I've asked the Prime Minister to repeat his election promise to cut power bills for Australian families by $275 every year. On 15 occasions the Prime Minister has refused. Will the Prime Minister finally admit he has broken his promise. 14:00 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I'm asked about energy policy and promises. We know we inherited an energy system that was broken. Twenty-two policies announced, none of them landed. An energy grid built for the last century. We have taken action to provide direct power bill relief for Australians, and those opposite voted against it. We've taken action for energy price caps, and those opposite, you guessed it, voted against it. We've taken action to promote investment in renewable energy and, you guessed it, they voted against it. And now we have the safeguards mechanism before the parliament and, of course, those opposite are voting against it. The member for Bass, to her credit, this morning pointed out the issues which were there. In the 2019 election, the member for Hume promised to reduce the wholesale price of electricity to $70 per megawatt. Seventy dollars by the end of 2021. Spoiler alert! It didn't happen. When they left office, it was not $70, not $170, not even $270, but $286! Missed it by that much! Promised $70, got $286. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hume will cease interjecting, particularly with those interjections, and I will hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Fletcher L6B Mr Speaker, it's on relevance. It was a very specific question about the promise to cut power bills by $275 every year. Speaker Jenkins ruled on these issues, and indeed you've ruled on these issues. I'd submit that the Prime Minister should be asked to be directly relevant to a tightly worded question. The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister was asked about commitments he's made about energy prices. I'm going to ask him to return back to the question. I give him the call. Mr ALBANESE R36 Thanks very much, Mr Speaker. Of course, one of the things we haven't done is to commit money like they did. They committed $4 million to the feasibility study on the Collinsville coal fired power plant. Those opposite also promised $1 billion that was going to deliver 3,800 megawatts of new power generation. How much did you deliver? The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister will pause. I will hear from the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Dutton 00AKI Mr Speaker, I think your ruling is being treated with complete contempt. You gave the Prime Minister a very clear instruction. He defies that direction from you. He will not mention this figure. He has broken his promise and he can't speak with a straight tongue. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Dickson will resume his seat. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Dunkley will cease interjecting. I can't hear what is being said. If members continue to interject, they will be warned and asked to leave the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 I don't need any assistance from the Leader of the Opposition. The Prime Minister has been asked about his commitments and energy prices. He is being relevant as long as he sticks to his commitments and energy prices. He's had a preamble; he's got one minute left to go. I give him the call. Mr ALBANESE R36 Thanks, Mr Speaker. I've spoken about— Mr Dutton 00AKI Did you make a promise or not? The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the Opposition has asked his question. I appreciate he wants an answer. So do I. I call the Prime Minister. Mr ALBANESE R36 Thanks, Mr Speaker. I've spoken directly about what we have done, which is bringing legislation— Mr Sukkar 242515 Say the number 275! The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Deakin is now warned! Mr ALBANESE R36 here into this parliament to give relief on power prices, and those opposite voted against it—$1.5 billion and they voted against it. They did promise a billion dollars to deliver new power generation. You know how much they spent? Zero. Not a single kilowatt, not enough to light a single light globe, from those opposite. They failed in government and they are failing in opposition. Australian Constitution: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice 50 14:05 Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Lingiari My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Australians. Minister, what progress has been made on the referendum to enshrine a voice for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in the Constitution? 14:05 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I think the member for Lingiari for her question. This is truly a really great day for this nation. Last night the Senate passed the referendum machinery bill with bipartisan support, and just a few hours ago the Prime Minister announced the wording of the constitutional amendment and the question that will be put to Australians at the referendum. That question is: A proposed law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration? It's a simple question. It's a matter from the heart. Six years ago, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people met at Uluru. The Statement from the Heart was the largest-ever First Nations consensus on a way forward for this country. There were 12 regional dialogues with more than 1,200 representatives—grassroots, bottom-up, not top-down. The Statement from the Heart is an invitation to walk together in a movement of the Australian people for a better future, to create constitutional reform so that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people can take our rightful place in the Constitution. I thank all members of the working group, the Attorney-General, Assistant Minister McCarthy and the legendary Senator Dodson for all their commitment and work. I also acknowledge the bravery and commitment of the Prime Minister, which the nation saw so clearly today, as well as my colleagues across the parliament who want to make a difference. This has been a rigorous and comprehensive process. The Australian people can be confident the work has been done to ensure a voice that works, a voice that makes a practical difference, a voice that is not another layer of bureaucracy but will hold bureaucracy to account, a voice that will move Australia forward for everyone. When we listen to people, lives change for the better. As Marcia Langton said: We're here to draw a line in the sand and say, 'This has to change, people's lives have to improve.' We know from the evidence that what improves people's lives is when they get a say. Let's work together and get this done. Energy 51 14:08 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister promised 97 times before the election that he would cut power prices by $275 per year—a promise he continued to make, 28 times, after Russia invaded Ukraine. Will the Prime Minister finally admit he has broken his promise? 14:08 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party for her question. It's not surprising it's question 2. I foreshadow that when the shadow Treasurer asks a question today I'm going to give the Treasurer a go today at question 4. I'm asked about the pressure on energy prices and the context we have. None other than former WA Liberal Premier—when the Liberal Party had more than two people in the Legislative Assembly!—Richard Court said that the past decade of national energy policy has been 'a slow-moving trainwreck'. Jennifer Westacott from the Business Council of Australia said: … we've not done the work that we should have done for the last decade. … we've really made a mess of energy policy. Dominic Perrottet—do you remember him? He's the bloke who won't be seen anywhere near this fellow opposite me. But there are two days to go! Don't miss the opportunity! I was in Monaro this morning— The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister will pause and I'll hear from— The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of The Nationals! I'm trying to hear the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party. Ms Ley 00AMN I raise a point of order on relevance. The Prime Minister has not mentioned the commitment to reduce power prices once. I believe he's flouting your ruling. I ask you to bring him back to the question or sit him down. The SPEAKER 53517 I thank the deputy leader for her assistance. I always enjoy her contributions, so I appreciate her assistance. I haven't made a ruling yet. Your point of order was on relevance. The Prime Minister has been going for one minute. The question was about power prices and was related to the war in Ukraine and to his commitment, so I'm going to listen carefully to what he says. He is talking about energy prices and quotes around energy prices, so he is being relevant, but I'll make sure that he sticks to the question. I give him the call. Mr ALBANESE R36 I certainly will, Mr Speaker. But I do note that a New South Wales Liberal Party member just objected to even the words 'Dominic Perrottet' being mentioned in this chamber— The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister will continue with his answer. Mr ALBANESE R36 but this is what the New South Wales Premier had to say: The issue here, that NSW, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia are dealing with now, has been the ideological war when it comes to climate change and energy policy in this country, and that has led to a lack of private sector investment … Why is it that, across other parliaments, the coalition and the Labor Party understand that this is about— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Fairfax! The Prime Minister will pause. Mr Ted O'Brien 138932 He's not answering the question. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fairfax! Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Prime Minister will pause. Member on my right! The member for Fairfax is close to me; I am hearing him. Trust me, I'm hearing him. If he continues to interject in that way, I will warn him. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy will cease interjecting as well. I'm going to ask the Prime Minister to return to the question with his answer. Mr ALBANESE R36 I'm asked about the issue of energy prices, and, very directly, the war—Russia's illegal war—against Ukraine was raised by the deputy leader in her question, and then they refuse to acknowledge that the ongoing impact of that war has had an impact on global energy prices. That is just a fact. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom! The Prime Minister will pause. The Prime Minister was asked about the war in Ukraine in the question. He is referencing directly that matter, so I'll hear from the Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. Mr Dutton 00AKI With respect, Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister was not asked about the war in Ukraine. Mr Albanese R36 Yes, I was. Mr Dutton 00AKI No, you weren't. The question was: The Prime Minister promised 97 times before the election that he would cut power prices by $275 per year—a promise he continued to make, 28 times, after Russia— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. Mr Dutton 00AKI Mr Speaker, I seek the call. The SPEAKER 53517 A question to me? Yes. Mr Dutton 00AKI Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister makes a mockery of your indications to— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. If you want to ask me a question, you may do so at the end of question time. The SPEAKER 53517 I haven't made a ruling. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll hear from the Leader of the Opposition. Mr 00AKI Mr Speaker, you went to the conduct of the House. It would be very easy for us to sit here with respect for the Prime Minister if we got a straight answer—if he abided by your ruling. But he cannot even answer the question put directly to him. T 53517 Resume your seat. I give the call to the Leader of the House. Mr Burke DYW On the point of order, it has always been the case that, if words are contained within the question, then the answer can be relevant to those words and, by including the reference to the war in Ukraine, that means that references by the Prime Minister to the impact of the war in Ukraine on energy prices are considered relevant, as has always been the case. The SPEAKER 53517 I'm just going to ask the Prime Minister: was part of the question about the invasion of Ukraine? Of course, any interpretation of the standing orders would make that part of the question relevant, if the Prime Minister is talking about that part of the question. I'm going to ask the House to remain silent while the Prime Minister continues with his answer. Mr ALBANESE R36 Thanks, Mr Speaker. Philip Lowe, the RBA governor, said this about the impact, on an ongoing basis, of Russia's invasion of Ukraine: 'The high inflation that we're currently experiencing is one of the legacies of the pandemic and of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.' That is what Philip Lowe said. That's what everyone here knows is a fact. Those opposite pretend that that hasn't been the case. This has had a global impact on energy prices. We are not immune to that because of the fact that the opposition's policies led to our exposure. (Time expired) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice 52 14:16 Dr REID 300126 Robertson My question is to the Prime Minister. Today, the government released the proposed wording on constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians through a voice. What opportunity does this offer the Australian people? 14:16 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member very much for his question and his commitment to the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which invites all Australians to walk together towards reconciliation and a better future. The provisions that we released today will enshrine two fundamental principles: recognition and consultation. It will do it in a way that absolutely minimises any risk of any non-considered issues. This is something we released in July, in a speech I gave at the Garma Festival. Since then, we've consulted with the Referendum Working Group, and I thank them for their work. Since then, we've also had a legal group advising the Referendum Working Group. Why do we need this to happen? It's because we urgently need better outcomes. We have a 10-year-gap in life expectancy between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. The suicide rate for Indigenous Australians is twice as high as that of non-Indigenous Australians. We have tragic levels of child mortality and disease. We have a massive over-representation in incarceration rates—per capita, the highest rate of any segment of the population that you can look at in the world. We need to do better. It's not because of a shortage of good intentions on both sides of this chamber. Today Ken Wyatt was proudly standing there next to me in the Blue Room for this announcement. He was, of course, Australia's first Indigenous person to hold the high office that he did. Governments have tried to impose solutions from Canberra. What this is about is doing things with Indigenous Australians, not to them or for them. That's why the Referendum Working Group process was so important. This presents every Australian with a historic democratic opportunity. We will give them that opportunity between October and December. If this is successful, this will be an inspiring and unifying Australian moment. It will be important in giving respect to First Nations people, but it will also be important to the way that we as non-Indigenous Australians see ourselves and see our nation as well, as we recognise the great privilege that we have of sharing this great island continent with the oldest continuous culture on earth. That should be recognised in our nation's 'birth certificate'. What Indigenous Australians are asking is that that that be done in a way which gives them a voice and which allows them to be consulted on matters that affect them. It's as simple as that: recognition and consultation. I urge Australians to examine the words that have been put forward, to look at the Uluru Statement from the Heart and vote yes for a better future for this country. DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 53 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Local Government Representatives 53 14:19 The SPEAKER 53517 I'm pleased to inform the House that in the gallery today we have a delegation of mayors from the Townsville region and councillors from Gippsland and from the Brisbane City Council. A very warm welcome to you all. Honourable members: Hear, hear! QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 53 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Climate Change 53 14:20 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin This is a question for the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. New fossil fuel projects have no place in our future net zero economy, and at some stage they will become stranded assets. Under the proposed safeguard mechanism, both new projects in sectors with a future and new fossil fuel projects can buy unlimited emissions offsets. How will the safeguard mechanism differentiate between these two types of new projects—the ones we need and the ones that will make it harder? 14:20 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for her question and her interest in this issue and her engagement. As the honourable member knows, the safeguard mechanism covers 215 existing facilities and will cover any facility that is new, of any type, which emits more than 100,000 tonnes of emissions each year. Indeed, that is part of the opportunity and the challenge of getting the policy design right, because it is important to capture every single facility, old and new, of varying types. And it is important to ensure that there is a framework in place for emissions reduction. I don't care whether it's an old facility, a longstanding existing facility or a new facility, of any type. It is also important to reflect the complexity of the different types and the types of abatement that are possible—and the honourable member refers to this. As I said yesterday in the House, some facilities have on-site abatement technology available to them now; others do not. Others have it emerging at different rates, and that's why the use of offsets is very important. In relation to how new entrants are treated, I'd just make this point. At the moment, the emissions from facilities that are projected to join would be around 38 million tonnes. We can reduce that very, very substantially. If the reforms pass, there will be a constraint on emissions from new facilities. If the reforms don't pass, there will be no constraints on emissions from new facilities—or old facilities. That's the choice before the parliament next week. In relation to design elements, I look forward to updating the public and the House and the Senate with the revised regulation. I said, when I released the draft on 9 January, that I would take advice and consult. There has been nine months of consultation, two different consultation papers, many hundreds of submissions and many, many meetings, including as late as today, between me and various industry groups. I look forward to that advice being reflected in the updated regulation, and I look forward to that regulation receiving the support of the crossbench and people of good faith across the parliament. AUKUS 54 14:22 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. What is the importance of Australia's future submarine capability to regional security? 14:23 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio I thank the member for his question—a member from the great defence state of South Australia. Last week's AUKUS announcement—indeed, the advancement of AUKUS—has clearly been very positive for our relationship with the United States and the United Kingdom. It has taken two of our deepest relationships to a new level. But it's important to understand what AUKUS is. AUKUS is not a collective, exclusive security pact. Australia's alliance with the United States is embodied in the ANZUS Treaty, not AUKUS. We have a long history of military engagement with Great Britain, but that stands quite aside from AUKUS. AUKUS is a hugely powerful technology-sharing arrangement between our three countries, the most significant part of which is to have the UK and the US working together to share the technology with Australia to operate a nuclear powered submarine. But that capability is all about our relationship with our region. Operating a nuclear powered submarine will be Australia's contribution to the collective security of the neighbourhood in which we live. As such, it stands to improve our relationship with our neighbours. And this is the message—with over 60 calls from the Prime Minister, me, the foreign minister, the minister for the Pacific to leaders in north-east Asia, in South-East Asia and the Pacific—that we gave. The response from our region to the announcement that we made last week has been gratifying. Fiji's Prime Minister Rabuka has expressed his support for the AUKUS agreement. Samoa's Prime Minister, Fiame, who was here yesterday, said she, understands Australia's rationale for acquiring nuclear powered submarines. Indonesia, in respect of AUKUS, said: Maintaining peace and stability in the region is the responsibility of all countries. It is critical for all countries to be a part of this effort. Malaysia said it: … appreciates the readiness on the part of the three countries, which are our close partners … in engaging with Malaysia at various levels and in sharing the … future outlook of AUKUS. And Japan's Prime Minister Kishida said, 'the undertakings of AUKUS will contribute to the peace and stability of the Indo-Pacific'. Australia draws our security from being a part of Asia, from being located in the Indo-Pacific. Operating nuclear powered submarines will be part of our contribution to the collective security of the region in which we live and the maintenance of the global rules-based order within the Indo-Pacific. Cost of Living 54 14:26 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Prime Minister. Kim, the owner of Barenz Cafe in my electorate, says patronage is lower, power bills are higher and cost-of-living pressures are holding back everyday spending. Will this out of touch Prime Minister finally admit that— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Macarthur is warned. Mr TAYLOR 231027 Australian families and businesses always pay more under Labor? 14:27 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thank you to the honourable member for his question. It's all I can do to get a question from the shadow treasurer, Mr Speaker. I acknowledge, as you did, Mr Speaker, the delegations from Townsville and Brisbane, and say particularly to the group from Townsville how much I enjoyed catching up with them through the course of the week. My advice to the shadow treasurer is to get on the blower to Kim and explain to Kim why when the shadow treasurer and all of those members over there had the opportunity to vote for a little bit of help when it came to a higher energy bills they left them hanging. Those opposite completely abandoned the people in every suburb of this country and every small business which will be eligible for the energy bill relief that was passed through this parliament no thanks to those opposite. It is especially galling to get a question from Australia's worst ever energy minister about energy prices. He was the worst performing minister in the worst performing government since Federation. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 I have to have silence from both sides of the chamber when I hear these points of order. I give the call to the member for Hume on a point of order. Mr Taylor 231027 The question was very specific. It was asking whether the Prime Minister would admit that Australian families and businesses always pay more under Labor. The SPE 53517 The member for Hume, it is not an excuse to read the question again just FYI. The Treasurer needs to be relevant. The question was about energy prices. I'm going to direct him to go to that part of the question. He has been going for over a minute now. Dr CHALMERS 37998 I was talking about energy prices, of course. The point that I am making is that when Kim and the other small business owners of this country, when the families and pensioners of this country, needed the Liberal and National parties to support the government in providing them a bit of assistance with their higher energy bills those opposite left them hanging. Those opposite completely abandoned the small businesses, the families and the pensioners of this country. When the parliament had the opportunity— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Spence. Dr CHALMERS 37998 to give them a little bit of help, those opposite went missing. Unfortunately, particularly when it comes to the member for Hume, there is a pattern of behaviour here. The now shadow minister—the former minister—is more responsible than anybody else in this place for the fact that we've had this energy market chaos for too long, which has made us more vulnerable to shocks in global energy markets. The guy that tried to hide price rises from the Australian people during the election, the guy that voted against helping small businesses and families and pensioners— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom. Dr CHALMERS 37998 and the guy that complained that that assistance wasn't arriving fast enough, is the guy that has the nerve to ask us about energy prices and the cost of living. If those opposite genuinely care about the cost-of-living pressures on Australian small businesses and families and pensioners, they wouldn't have abandoned them in their time of need like they did in December in this place. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Longman is warned. There is far too much noise. If it continues, I will issue a general warning on both sides of the chamber. Economy 55 14:30 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa My question is to the Treasurer. What economic conditions and pressures are confronting Australia as the government works to finalise its second budget in May? 14:31 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin As the member for Werriwa and other honourable members know, volatility in global financial markets, brought about by rapidly rising interest rates around the world, is having an impact on our economy and on all of the major advanced economies around the world. We have been engaging with APRA, ASIC, the RBA, Treasury and the banks, and their advice is that our institutions are well capitalised and well regulated, and that we are well placed to deal with the volatility that is coming at us. What we're seeing on global markets is feeding into some uncertainty in the global economy, which is now tempering some of the slightly more upbeat forecasts that we had been seeing for the advanced economies. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hume will cease interjecting. Dr CHALMERS 37998 The pressures that are coming at us from around the world are being felt around the kitchen tables of this country. At a time when the medium-term pressures on our budget are intensifying rather than easing, and when our predecessors left key programs, like the My Health Record program, completely unfunded beyond the middle of this year, it's more important than ever that this is a responsible budget in May. It will build on the substantial restraint we showed in October as well. Mr Taylor 231027 You are a sad political hack. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Treasurer will resume his seat. The member for Hume will withdraw that comment. Mr Taylor 231027 I withdraw. The SPEAKER 53517 I thank the member. The Treasurer has the call. Dr CHALMERS 37998 That restraint that was showed in October is best represented by the fact that we returned 99 per cent for two years of the upward revenue revisions. The previous government averaged 40 per cent and the Howard government averaged 30 per cent. We had payments falling in real terms over the next two years; the previous government averaged 2.6 per cent real spending growth before the pandemic. We had payments growing in nominal terms by an average annual rate of 4.3 compared to 5.9 under our predecessors. Most importantly, we found $22 billion in savings in the March budget. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom. Dr CHALMERS 37998 The last budget from those opposite delivered precisely zero dollars in savings. That's the sort of restraint that we showed in the October budget, and we'll see it again in the May budget. For all of these reasons, the Governor of the Reserve Bank made it clear in the middle of February that we aren't adding to inflationary pressures in our economy. If anything, we're actually moderating inflation with our energy price plan. We have a lot going for us in this country but we have got a lot coming at us as well. The budget in May, like the budget in October, will have common elements: the combination of near-term and longer-term priorities; the best combination of relief, repair and restraint; and a premium on the quality of spending, not just the quantity of spending so that we can continue to invest in our people and their futures and clean up the mess that we were left by those opposite. Renewable Energy 56 14:34 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Can the minister advise the number of hectares of prime agricultural land that will be required for solar farms as part of the government's renewable energy mix? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order, members on my left! The member for Barker. The Leader of the Nationals asked his question in silence and the minister will be heard in silence. 14:34 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I'm delighted to take a question from the Leader of the National Party about solar farms and prime agricultural land. The week before last I opened Australia's largest solar farm at Uralla in the electorate of the member for New England, but the Member for New England wasn't there. The state member, Mr Marshall, was there to join me in celebrating the opening. We had the big shearing clips out to cut the ribbon. The interesting thing about Australia's largest solar farm in Uralla—the honourable member, the Leader of the National Party, asked me about prime agricultural land and solar farms, and I'm delighted that he did. At Australia's largest solar farm in Uralla, the proponent has worked with the landowners— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Spence is warned. Mr BOWEN DZS an agricultural family of many generations standing in New England, and they have designed the solar panels as such— Opposition members interjecting— Mr BOWEN DZS Don't you want to hear about the wonderful interaction of agriculture and renewable energy in Uralla? The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will resume his seat. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for New England. Order! Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Members on my right. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Spence will leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Spence then left the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 This continual interruption will not continue. I want to hear from the Leader of the Nationals. Mr Littleproud 265585 The point of order is on relevance. This is a very tight question around the number of hectares of prime agricultural land across the country. Not in one specific place; across the country. If he doesn't know, he should sit down. But farmers are getting very concerned about it. The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. The 53517 The minister for infrastructure will cease interjecting or she'll be warned and asked to leave the chamber as well. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hume: one more time and you'll be warned as well. You've had a fair go. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy has been going for one minute. I'm going to ask him to return. It was a specific question— An honourable member interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order. I'm going to give him the call, unless I can't hear him. He has the call. Mr BOWEN DZS The Leader of the National Party asked me about agricultural land and solar farms. The wonderful thing about agricultural land and solar farms is how they can interact. At Australia's largest solar farm, in the electorate of the member for New England, the landowners have worked with the company so the solar panels are designed so they can— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Climate Change and Energy, resume your seat. Leader of the Nationals, resume your seat. It's not a free for all where you jump up. You've had a point of order. The minister can assist the House by returning back to the question. Mr BOWEN DZS When the drought hits, they have a diverse source of income. This is the point. They say that solar farms and renewable energy and agriculture can't co-exist. Honourable members interjecting— Mr BOWEN DZS They're wrong! They don't understand the regions! Honourable members interjecting— Mr BOWEN DZS They don't understand the areas they're meant to represent. Maybe if the member for New England would turn up and listen, they would know. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Members on my right and the member for Hasluck will cease interjecting. I'm issuing a general warning across the House. That behaviour is completely unacceptable. Homelessness 57 14:38 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra My question is for the Minister for Housing and the Minister for Homelessness. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering for people most in need of housing in Australia, and what are the risk of delaying the passage of the Housing Australia Future Fund Bill through the parliament? 14:38 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I want to thank the member for Canberra for her important question because I know that she, like everyone in this place I'm sure, finds it unacceptable that 123,000 Australians were homeless on census night in 2021. Each of those Australians has a story to tell, and each story is one that all of us should be listening to. Over 80 per cent of the increase in people who are homelessness are women. And I want to remind members in this place and the other place that that's why, in its first five years, returns from the Housing Australia Future Fund will deliver 4,000 homes for women and children impacted by family and domestic violence and for older women at risk of homelessness, as well as $100 million for crisis and transitional housing options for these people. Sadly the data also showed that Indigenous Australians are over nine times more likely to experience homelessness. That's why returns from our Housing Australia Future Fund will provide $200 million for repairs, maintenance and improvements for housing in remote Indigenous communities. As the Minister for Veterans' Affairs said yesterday, in the census there was a new question to gauge the number of veterans and serving members of the Australian Defence Force who are homeless. Opposition members interjecting— Ms COLLINS HWM That answer is not one that is funny or that we should be proud of. On census night 1,555 veterans were homeless. Again, that's why returns from the Housing Australia Future Fund will provide $30 million to build housing and fund specialist services for veterans who are experiencing, or are at risk of experiencing, homelessness. As I said yesterday, of the 123,000 people, 23 per cent were young people aged 12 to 24. The data shows that we all need to work together to do better. That's why at the last election we put to the Australian people a plan to tackle the country's housing challenges. Fundamental to our plan is increasing supply of new housing, and we are already delivering. Today homes are underway already across the country from our Housing Infrastructure Facility broadening. In our first budget, we had the National Housing Accord. We've already stood up the Interim National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, and work has begun on a National Housing and Homelessness Plan. We want the National Housing Accord, the National Housing and Homelessness Plan and the Housing Australia Future Fund working together, on independent advice from the Interim National Housing Supply and Affordability Council, helping everybody work together and lifting the states and territories and putting pressure on them too to do more. Our $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund will be the largest boost to social and affordable housing in more than a decade. Our fund will help deliver more homes. I urge people in this place to support it, because Australians that need it most— (Time expired) Energy 58 14:41 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest My question is to the Prime Minister. At the last election, did the Prime Minister promise the Australian people that power bills would go down by $275 per year? 14:42 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for the question and I thank the Prime Minister for the opportunity to remind the House that we, indeed, went to the people with a very comprehensive plan for energy prices and a very comprehensive plan for energy, which involved an end to the chaos and dysfunction of 22 energy policies over 10 years. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will resume his seat. The member for Dawson will cease interjecting. The minister's been going for about 20 seconds, but I'll hear from the Leader of the Opposition. Mr 00AKI Mr Speaker, the question was put to the Prime Minister. It's a question only capable of being answered by the Prime Minister, because it goes to his commitment given to the Australian people at the last election. The question should be answered straightly by the Prime Minister. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll hear from the Leader of the House. Mr Burke DYW There are two matters. First of all, as the Leader of the Opposition knows very well, the Prime Minister is able to direct questions to various policy areas. On a strict view of standing orders, the question is completely out of order anyway. Opposition members: Why? Mr Burke DYW Why? Because you have to ask about what people are doing as ministers, and it makes no reference to it. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting. I'm trying to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Fletcher L6B Mr Speaker, I seek your clarification of the proposition that the Leader of the House has just put. He's essentially arguing that, if a minister is consistently breaking his promise, he can't be asked about it. Is that seriously what the Leader of the House is putting? The SPEAKE 53517 Resume your seat. I will hear from the Leader of the House. Mr Burke DYW Simply to clarify what the Manager of Opposition Business just sought—a question is not able to only ask about a period when someone was in opposition. You're not allowed to have a question where every word of it is about what was said in opposition. It's completely out of order. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left. The member for Groom! Order! The minister is answering the question. I have ruled the question in order. On the second part, as the Leader of the Opposition and members know, the Practice on page 549 allows the transfer of questions, as has been a long practice in this parliament. Mr BOWEN DZS As I was saying, I welcome the opportunity to remind the House that we went to the election with a very comprehensive energy policy, accompanied by modelling. The modelling showed the impacts of our policies by 2025. That is true; it did. It showed the impact of our policies by 2025, because releasing modelling with your comprehensive policy is now the benchmark. That's the best practice, which you will have to meet. I look forward to you releasing your modelling on the impact of the cost of nuclear power stations and the location of nuclear power stations! I can't wait for that modelling to be released! The SPEAKER 53517 The Treasurer will cease interjecting. Mr BOWEN DZS I can't wait for the election for those policies to be discussed and debated! Release the policy, release the modelling, on nuclear power any time you like. The SPEAKER 53517 Has the minister concluded his answer? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left! Climate Change: Safeguard Mechanism 59 14:46 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Why are the Albanese Labor government's safeguard mechanism reforms an economic and environmental priority? What would be the consequences of not reforming the safeguard mechanism? 14:46 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank my honourable friend for his question and recognise his contribution to the House. In the 10 months he's been here, he's made a wonderful contribution. Next week the parliament will have a chance to draw a line under the 10 years of delay and denial of climate policy in Australia. Next week the parliament will have a chance to send a message to people in Australia and to investors around the world that those 10 years of denial and delay are over. Next week the parliament will have a choice between delay and action—action on reducing emissions, action on encouraging investment in renewable energy and decarbonisation. The honourable member asks about the consequences if we don't take that choice. The consequences will be very clear: 205 million extra tonnes of emissions in the air if we don't act. If we don't take this opportunity, the consequences would be that, instead of achieving a 43 per cent emissions reduction by 2030, it will be 35 per cent. These are the consequences of not acting. The consequences of continuing with 10 years of dysfunction would be that the world will get a mixed message from our country. This parliament sent the world a message last year that we have one energy policy, one climate change policy, that's enshrined in the law of the land. Now is the time to implement this, and the key is attracting investment to decarbonise. There has been strong support for our policy from people who want to invest in our decarbonisation. Rebecca Mikula-Wright, the CEO of the Investor Group on Climate Change, said 'Policy uncertainty has been the biggest handbrake for long-term investors who are ready to invest in economy-wide decarbonisation.' Or Kristy Graham, the CEO of the Australian Sustainable Finance Institute, said of the safeguard mechanism's reforms, 'It'll provide an important signal to international investors, lenders and insurers that Australian climate policy is continuing to strengthen and enable Australia to attract capital to support the climate transition.' And that's what it's all about. Investment equals jobs. Capital equals jobs. But capital craves policy certainty. Capital craves policy stability. That's what this government is giving the Australian people and investors from around the world. That's what we invite the parliament to join with us in providing—in providing that stability and certainty of a framework for investment right throughout our regions in Australia's big industries, who can decarbonise and be world-leading in a decarbonising world. That is what is at stake in this parliament next week. The chance to give Australian industry and Australian workers that opportunity. I'm confident. I believe that parliament can and will seize that opportunity and not squander it. Brisbane Olympic Games: Redevelopment 59 14:49 Mr CHANDLER-MATHER 300121 Griffith My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, you have said you support the $2.7 billion Gabba demolition and rebuild, which will see the destruction of a local public school and park and the resuming of homes. Why did the federal government commit $3.4 billion to the Olympics without first demanding the Queensland government drop the destructive Gabba demolition? Can you explain to the families of East Brisbane State School and the residents of Kangaroo Point why you support destroying their public school and park? 14:50 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I'll tell you what we do support. We support Brisbane hosting the Olympics. We support that unapologetically, and that's why we are building a major centre. That won't just be about the Olympics, though. What the Brisbane arena will be about is giving the people of South-East Queensland and, indeed, the entire nation a venue that will be used not just for the Olympics, a venue that will be used for decades to come. That is what we're about. We're about supporting the jobs that are there in a real way. We are about making sure that we get this policy right. And, just as Melbourne continues to benefit from hosting the 1956 Games, and Sydney continues to benefit from hosting the 2000 Games, Brisbane and, indeed, the whole of Queensland will benefit, including from the 19 separate projects that we will provide funding for— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Griffith will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 including right throughout regional Queensland, the Sunshine Coast, the Gold Coast, Toowoomba— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Solomon is warned. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Bean is warned. Mr ALB R36 North Queensland, Central Queensland and Far North Queensland. They will all benefit from that. Mr Chandler-Mather 300121 Mr Speaker— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The members on my left will cease interjecting. The Prime Minister was talking about redevelopment and the Olympics, which is what the question was about, but I'll give the member for Griffith the benefit of the doubt and hear his point of order. Mr Chandler-Mather 300121 My point of order is on relevance, Mr Speaker. We just want an answer on the support for destroying the school. That's all the parents and kids want to hear about. The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. For the member for Griffith's benefit: you can't rewrite the question when you take a point of order. You've asked your question. The Prime Minister is being directly relevant. Mr ALBANESE R36 I support the Olympics. We on this side of the parliament, the government, support the Olympics. The Queensland state government support the Olympics. I think there is bipartisan support for the Olympics. It's a good thing. It's a good thing for our economy, but it's more important than that as well. Already there are youngsters around who will be inspired— T 53517 The member for Griffith will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 to compete in the lead-up to the 2032 Games. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Macnamara will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 It will give inspiration to the athletes of tomorrow to aim for that, just as we saw in the year 2000 such an enormous benefit from— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Barker and the member for Macnamara are both warned. Mr R36 We saw the extraordinary benefit from the 2000 Olympics. We also, by the way, support the World Cup football that we'll be hosting with New Zealand in a few months time—the third-most-watched event on the globe. After the football World Cup for men and the Olympics is the football World Cup for women. All of these big events do require an investment, but they produce a return. And I'll make this tip: there'll be Greens MPs queuing up for tickets if any of them are around at the time. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for McEwen is warned. Early Childhood Education 60 14:54 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore My question is to the Minister for Early Childhood Education. What will the Albanese Labor government's landmark reforms— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Leader of the Nationals will cease interjecting while people are asking their questions. I've been crystal clear about that all week. If he continues to do that, he will be asked to leave. Reset the clock. I'll ask the member for Gilmore to ask her question. Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 My question is to the Minister for Early Childhood Education. What will the Albanese Labor government's landmark reforms to make early childhood education cheaper mean for families across Australia? When will this come into effect? 14:54 Dr ALY 13050 Cowan I thank the most excellent member for Gilmore for her question. I want to acknowledge the extremely hard way in which the member for Gilmore works for the people that she represents in Gilmore and the families that she represents. In October 2020 the Prime Minister delivered his budget reply speech as opposition leader, in which he committed future Labor governments to making early childhood education and care more affordable. It was the most significant on-budget promise we made when in opposition, and, in our first six months in government, we've passed legislation in this House honouring that commitment. We're delivering on that commitment, we're keeping that promise and we're getting the job done. We know that, when Australian families sit down at the kitchen table and go through their household budgets, one of the first things that they have to factor in is the cost of early childhood education and care. Often that cost means that they then have to go on to work out how many hours they can work, and it often limits how many hours they can work or how many extra days they can work before that money is eaten up in early childhood education and care fees. We're fixing that, and, in just 100 days, around 1.2 million families right across Australia are going to benefit from our reforms. They can now start planning for the meaningful and ongoing cost-of-living relief that will hit their pockets from 1 July. For the average family on about $120,000 a year with a child in care three days a week, our changes will save them $1,700 a year. That's going to make a huge difference. Our reforms aren't just about affordability. They will also ensure that children across Australia will benefit from the transformational effects of early learning. The research tells us this, and we know this. I've said before that children will be the main beneficiaries of our reforms, and it's true. This is an investment not just in the future of our country, not just in our economy, but in the future of Australian children, something I know that every member in this House is committed to. More Australian children will have access to the health and education benefits in those foundational years of learning, no matter what their background is, no matter who their parents are, no matter what their postcode is, no matter where they live. I am proud to be part of the Albanese Labor government, which delivers on our promises and puts Australian families first. We're taking meaningful action on the cost of living, giving real and responsible relief to families, and our reforms will deliver just that. Victoria: Energy 61 14:57 Mr WOLAHAN 235654 Menzies My question is to the Prime Minister. By how much has the Essential Services Commission determined that the Victorian default offer will increase from 1 July? 14:58 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler What Clare Savage of the Australian Energy Regulator has said about the default market offer is the following: 'We have seen unprecedented volatility in our wholesale electricity markets over the last couple of years. We have had very high coal and gas prices as a result of the war in Ukraine and the recovery from the pandemic.' She went on to say, 'We've also seen a number of outages, in particular at old coal plants,' and that was a result of natural disasters having an impact. She went on to say: 'The proposed increase to the default market offer is much, much lower than it would have otherwise been. Forward contract prices for 2023-24 have fallen substantially since governments began discussing possible interventions in gas and coal markets in October 2022.' She said that, it has been backed up by the RBA Governor, it has been backed up by every economist, which is why every government in the country came together to support caps on gas and coal and to put downward pressure on the default market offer, which we released, unlike those opposite who hid it. Child Care 61 14:59 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons My question is to the Minister for Education. What impact would the Albanese Labor government's plans for cheaper child care have on family budgets? What reaction has there been to this from families? 14:59 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank my friend the legendary member for Lyons for his question. In 100 days time, child care will get a lot cheaper for more than one million Australian families. We are on the cusp of real cost-of-living relief for more than a million Australian families. Child care is expensive; ask any mum or dad with children in care and they'll tell you that. They'll tell you it's essential. They'll tell you they need it. They'll tell you that the cost is going up and up and up. I told the parliament, when I introduced the cheaper childcare legislation last year, that the cost of child care had gone up by 41 per cent under the Liberal-National government over the last eight years. But I've made a blue. I've got it wrong. I may have accidentally misled the House, because information released today now tells us that the cost of child care under the former government went up not by 41 per cent but by 49 per cent. That's their record. That's why what we promised is so important, what we're doing is so important and what we're delivering is so important. It's why the Prime Minister made this the first policy that he announced in his budget reply speech, and why we all campaigned for it, right across the country. The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, there is a general warning in place at the moment. Mr CLARE HWL It's why Australians voted for it in May of last year and why the opposition opposed it right up until election day. I'm asked about the reaction of families to the policy that we took to the last election. There are lots of reasons why families voted the way they did in May last year. There are lots of reasons why families in those formerly safe seats of Liberal legends like Menzies, Turnbull, Abbott and Frydenberg voted the way they did, and why these are no longer Liberal seats, why they're crossbench seats up there; or why the seats of Howard and Costello are now over here, behind me. But this is one of them. Our cheaper childcare policy is one of them. It starts in 100 days. For a family on a combined income of $120,000, with one child in care for three days a week, it'll mean that they'll save $1,700 per year. That's real money that will make a real difference. It means more kids getting access to quality early learning and care. It means that it'll be cheaper for their parents. It'll mean that more parents, particularly more mums, will be able to get back to paid work if they want to. That's why I say this is good for children, it's good for parents, and it's good for our economy. It's only 100 days away. Climate Change 62 15:02 Dr SCAMPS 299623 Mackellar My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. In a July Press Club address about the State of the environment report, you stated, 'Global warming multiplies environmental pressures everywhere.' The IPCC, the pre-eminent international body on the science of climate, again, just two days ago, emphatically stated there must be no new fossil fuel projects if we are to meet our Paris agreement obligations. Does the government accept or reject the IPCC advice? Ms Ley 00AMN Here comes the next Labor Prime Minister! The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, I thought we'd been through this, but I'll go through it one last time. When a minister is approaching the dispatch box, just like when you are approaching the dispatch box, it is not appropriate to interject. 15:03 Ms PLIBE 83M Sydney RSEK (—) (): I want to thank the member for Mackellar for her question because I know she cares passionately about the environment, about nature and about climate change. Of course, on this side, we share her concerns. We know that the IPCC report is important, and it's important that we take note of its implications globally. Australia certainly has to do its share to make sure we get to a net zero planet for our kids and our grandkids, for human beings and for nature. I thank her for her question, and I reassure her that we take her concerns seriously. We need to put Australia on a new path, a new path towards a renewable energy future. We believe that. That's why we're doing it. That's why the best and most-important thing we can do as a parliament is to pass the safeguard mechanism so we can get to net zero. Those opposite spent almost a decade in denial. If they had acted when they could have, we would be a lot further down the path towards a decarbonised future than we now are. They had 22 separate energy policies. The only place they actually overachieved was in coming up with energy policies. Sadly, they didn't land a single one. We on this side are boosting renewables as a share of our electricity grid to 82 per cent. As the minister says, 82 per cent in 82 months—that is a huge achievement. There is $20 billion for Rewiring the Nation and six new renewable energy zones in Newcastle, the Illawarra, Gippsland, Bass Strait, Bunbury and western Victoria. We are changing our environmental laws so that we can get these new renewable projects through the pipeline more quickly. We have $3 billion of the $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund that is for low-emissions technologies and no new funding for coal and gas from the National Reconstruction Fund. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Wannon and the minister for infrastructure will cease interjecting. I can't hear the Minister for the Environment. The minister has the call. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M We are supporting electric cars. We have signed the methane pledge. We have passed laws to protect the ozone layer. Decarbonising Australia is a massive job, but we are getting on with that job by constructing new renewable energy projects, by upgrading our poles and wires, by transforming our grid and by getting cheaper, cleaner renewable energy into our homes and businesses. It is not just good for the environment it is actually great for energy self-reliance, as well, and if we had started this massive job nine years ago, when we could have, we would be a lot further down the track now. Paid Parental Leave Scheme 62 16:06 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How will parents be better off when the Albanese Labor government's paid parental leave changes come into effect on 1 July? 15:07 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I would like to thank the member for Macarthur for his question, for his advocacy for families in his seat and for the years and years he has spent supporting families and bringing new babies into the world. He, like so many on this side of the House, knows just how important are those early moments spent bonding with a new baby. That is why I was so pleased that earlier this month, the government's paid parental leave legislation passed both houses. Paid parental leave is a proud Labor legacy, and the Albanese government is now building on that legacy. We are getting on with the job of expanding paid parental leave, making it more flexible and making it better when it comes to shared care. We know there is more to do to improve gender equality and women's workforce participation, but so far this government is delivering. We are delivering to families right across this country. In 100 days, working families will begin to enjoy the benefits of our changes to paid parental leave. I am pleased to update the House that, this Sunday, pre-claiming under the improved Paid Parental Leave scheme will start. It will be available for parents having a baby due from 1 July. Opening up pre-claiming is very important for expecting families. It is a great feature of the scheme because it allows families to get their applications sorted before their baby arrives. We know that raising children and managing work is a juggle for many parents. We also know that it is a time when there are bills to pay and a lot of chaos in the house, so families need to be able to get that support without any bumps. Because of our changes, over 180,000 families each year will benefit from a stronger, more generous Paid Parental Leave scheme that is right for the times and right for the future. Not only will more parents have access to the government payment, they will also have more flexibility in how they transition back to work, which is important for shared care so dads and parents can spend more time with their baby. We also know that when parents share care it is good for gender equality, it is good for kids and it is good for the economy. Opposition members interjecting— Ms RISHWORTH HWA I am not sure what all these interjections are over here. Do those opposite not support our new paid parental leave scheme? Do they not support the good action this government is taking for families? Because it is this government that is delivering for Australian families. It is this government that is listening to their views and delivering cheaper child care, cheaper medicines, better more flexible paid parental leave, and I ask them to get on board. Mr Albanese R36 Given the member for Banks still can't get a question, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper, and I wish him well on Monday. DOCUMENTS 63 DOCUMENTS Presentation 63 15:10 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. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 63 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Albanese Government 63 15:10 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable member for Hume proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Prime Minister's claim that Australians have had a pretty good ten months. I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:11 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume The PM reminded us this week on several occasions that it has been 10 months since this Labor government came to power. In the lead-up to the election, in the lead-up to the last 10 months, Labor made many promises and, sadly, in the space of 10 months—10 months that the Prime Minister has described as 10 pretty good months—we have seen a growing list of broken promises. We can only assume there are more to come. I'm sure those on this side of the House remember the promise of cheaper mortgages—broken. We remember the promise of no changes to superannuation—broken. We remember the promise of lower inflation—broken. We remember the promise 'we are not touching franking credits'—broken. We remember the promise that 'industry-wide bargaining is not part of our policy'—broken. We remember the promise 'we are doing our bit to assist real wage increases'—broken. We remember the promise that they are not about raising taxes—broken. We remember the promise to cut the cost of consultants and contractors—broken. And, of course, we remember the promise of a $275 reduction in electricity prices—broken. These are all broken promises from a tricky government, from a tricky Prime Minister who is incapable of showing any empathy for the real issues that Australians are facing. Mr Perrett HVP Get out of here. You don't know what empathy is. Mr TAYLOR 231027 In fact, I will take that interjection because this Prime Minister wants to talk about anything—anything—except the pressures that Australians are facing in their families and in their businesses. In these last 10 months—a pretty good 10 months, he claims—we have seen interest rates rise for nine consecutive months. These are rate increases we have not seen in this country for 30 years. We have not reached these inflation levels since 1990. Power prices are going up. We just heard the last DMO—20 per cent increases. The Prime Minister does not even know the difference between the DMO and the Victorian default market offer. He didn't know the answer to that today. He has no idea because, quite frankly, this Prime Minister does not care about the pressures Australians are facing. He does not care at all. This is not his problem. His problem is power. That is what he is interested in—getting into power and staying in power. That is all he cares about. I tell you what, he will have a problem with power in the next couple of years because there will not be a lot of it in this country, the way this government is going with electricity prices and electricity supply. We have also seen in the last 10 months increased taxes. We've seen people on double incomes asking for help from charities to put food of the table. These are families with double incomes, and they're going to charities, in my electorate and elsewhere, because they can't put food on the table. People are being forced to take second jobs to pay the bills. A record number of Australians are turning to Lifeline, and this Prime Minister seriously thinks that it's been a good 10 months under this government. How out of touch is of this Prime Minister? As I said, interest rates have gone up nine consecutive times under this government, and this latest increase means that a person with a typical mortgage of $750,000 is paying $1,700 more a month than they were before the election. That's $20,000 a year. No wonder we have families going to Lifeline. Quite seriously, this is absolutely diabolical. It's a scary time for many Australians; that's the reality. It is a scary time for many Australians, and when asked questions on this, the Prime Minister stands up, scoffs, laughs and refuses to answer. He refuses to answer because he is an out-of-touch prime minister. The latest national accounts show it is getting much harder for Australians to make ends meet. In fact, we saw interest paid on mortgages grow by 23 per cent during the December quarter. Instead of working in tandem with the Reserve Bank to take pressure off interest rates, the government is putting all of its energy into breaking promises and taxing Australians more. That's its solution to the problem for all Australians—tax them more. It's clear that the government isn't doing enough to make the Reserve Bank's job easier. Australians, as a result, are facing a full-blown cost-of-living crisis. Data from the Reserve Bank says that 54 per cent of Australians with a mortgage will see that mortgage go from a fixed rate to a flexible rate this year. It is very important for those opposite to understand—it's clear the Prime Minister doesn't understand this; I don't think he really cares—that those on fixed rates have mortgage payments now on an interest rate of 2½ per cent. That's what they're moving from, and then they are going to be moving onto a new rate which is many times that. When he is asked questions on it, the Prime Minister says, 'It's okay. It's been a pretty good 10 months.' You can look at the broader cost of living. We've seen a report recently from Finder. It says that 43 per cent of consumers are stressed about their grocery costs. It says that one in three Australians have asked friends or families for financial help in the past 12 months. And this Prime Minister wants to talk about everything else, except for that pressure. A total of 87 per cent of parents have had to reduce their spending on at least one expense due to the increased cost of living. Research from Roy Morgan shows us that an estimated 1.2 million mortgage holders—that's 25 per cent of mortgage holders—were at risk of mortgage stress. I mentioned Lifeline earlier, and it's worth looking in detail at the numbers here, because they've reported an increase of almost 50 per cent in requests for help. There was no empathy from the Prime Minister when he was asked questions on these issues. Canstar's research has shown that 54 per cent of Aussies are losing confidence in the ability of the government to ease cost-of-living pressures. They're giving up on the government, and why wouldn't you? They want to talk about everything else, except for this. Tragically, data from Suicide Prevention Australia shows that 46 per cent of Australians have reported feeling increased pressure as the cost-of-living pressures continue to rise—up from five per cent the previous year. Honourable members interjecting— Mr TAYLOR 231027 I'm talking about suicide, and I think a little bit of respect is appropriate. Now, we've heard many real-life examples of all of this this week. The member for Herbert has raised the story of Peter in his electorate, who's having to make a heartbreaking choice between heating and eating. That's where it has got to. The member for Petrie raised the power bills of Kazik and Tatiana, who've seen their bills rise by 72 per cent. The member for Cook highlighted the devastating story of Caruso's Italian, run by Rocky and Kerrin, who, due to the rising costs of doing business, have had to close their iconic small business. It was an absolutely iconic small business. And in my electorate, Kym, the owner of the fantastic Barenz—anyone who has been to Camden on multiple occasion will know Barenz—is seeing fewer and fewer customers. 'You can see the pressures of the cost of living,' says Kym. You can see the pressures of the cost of living. These are the real stories of Australians struggling right now. These are the tough choices that Australians are having to make. And what has the Prime Minister said in response? Today, on being asked these questions, he simply refused to answer. He refused to take responsibility. He is a prime minister who promised to take responsibility, and the best he can say is: 'It's been a pretty good 10 months.' 15:21 Mr GORMAN 74519 Perth After that performance, aren't we lucky we didn't have another 10 months of that mob in government—the 'not my job' coalition. We are so fortunate that the Australian people chose to give them the time in opposition to think about the failures that they left behind and what they need to do to reform themselves. If we want to talk about the first 10 months, if we want to compare notes, let's have a look at the first 10 months of the Leader of the Opposition when he was health minister. In his first 10 months, health minister Peter Dutton offered Australia a $7 GP tax. He was trying to make it more expensive for every Australian to go to the doctor. It was a fundamental assault on Medicare. That was the first 10 months of the Leader of the Opposition when he was health minister. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Is there a point of order? What is your point of order? Mr Hogan 218019 Relevance. The MPI is on the first 10 months of this government. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister is being entirely relevant to the very broad terms of the matter of public importance, and you know that as well as I do, Member for Page, so I wouldn't jump up again. The SPEAKER 53517 Member for Longman? Mr Young 201906 If the member for Hunter wants to keep interjecting, could he do it from his chair? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I'll be the person who determines interjections from where anyone is sitting, and if you interject, even in your seat, I'll pull you up. Likewise, the member for Hunter will not be interjecting from his seat, whether he's in his proper or the one he's currently sitting in. Now, I'd really like to hear from the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister. Mr GORMAN 74519 It is entirely relevant, because in the last 10 months of this government we have been cleaning up the 10 years of mess that was left by those opposite, and that mess started when the Leader of the Opposition was appointed as the health minister. He offered Australia a $7 GP tax—a fundamental assault on Medicare. He tried to increase the cost of medicines by $5. And then he had his big, bright policy idea: that we would charge people when they rock up to emergency departments. That was what happened in the first 10 months when the now Leader of the Opposition was in the position of health minister. No wonder one of his other achievements in his first 10 months was to be voted the worst-ever health minister. But we can continue. Let's look at his 10 months as opposition leader. The Leader of the Opposition, in his first 10 months, couldn't even get invited to the campaign launch of the New South Wales Liberal Party. He showed his fantastic judgement in the first 10 months when he called the robodebt royal commission a 'witch-hunt', when, as it has turned out, it has exposed so much of the failure that sat underneath the Morrison-Abbott-Turnbull government. We found ourselves seeing the Leader of the Opposition defending the secret ministries. Then, when it came to whether or not there were any new policy ideas from the Leader of the Opposition, he found that he didn't even have his own policy ideas. He was still stuck with Tony Abbott's one-word policy prescription, 'no'—or, to turn it into a three-word slogan, 'no, no, no'. I have to wonder why we are having an MPI about the last 10 months, because, if we were to talk about the last 11 months, maybe we would also be covering things such as the secret ministries scandal, which saw the then Prime Minister, the member for Cook, holding five secret ministries. There were two secret assistant ministers, which we only found out about last week. None of them had the guts to stand up and tell us about the two secret assistant ministers operating in the Morrison government. I thought it was interesting that the shadow minister opposite didn't mention that the inflation problem started on their watch, didn't mention that interest rates started increasing on their watch and didn't mention that, when they walked out the door, they left a trillion dollars of Liberal debt for the Australian taxpayers to repay. Of course, I'm disappointed that the shadow minister is no longer here, because they also left us with a secret energy price increase. I'm fascinated by this, because what we know about the secret energy price increase is, firstly, that the shadow minister, when he was asked on 26 October last year whether he had known before the election that prices would rise, said, 'No, I didn't.' A week later, on 1 November, when he was asked if he had signed the regulation delaying notification of the price rise, he said, 'I did, as it was recommended by the industry department.' So we have someone who is lecturing the current government when his own record was one of deception, hiding things from the Australian people before an election, and then refusing after the election to even own up to it. Mr GORMAN 74519 I will take the interjection from those opposite, who are saying they want to hear more about what the Albanese government is doing for the people of Australia. I take that interjection. Let's look at it. We supported an increase—again, because of a choice the Australian people made—to the minimum wage. We said, 'Absolutely we support it.' Those opposite went to the election saying they didn't support an increase in the minimum wage. We have backed a pay increase for aged-care workers, 15 per cent, so that they start to get the pay they deserve for the work for which we have for far too long said, 'Thank you,' but not given them the pay that they deserve. We've cut the price of PBS medicines down to $30, saving a family with two or three scripts a month up to $450 a year, and in 100 days from today we will see child care cheaper for 1.2 million Australian families. I will contrast that with what we saw from those opposite, who proudly presided over a 49 per cent increase in the cost of child care for working families in Australia over 10 years. Also, when it was clear that we needed to take urgent action because of the challenges in the energy market, we brought this parliament back on 15 December, brought legislation into this place and asked every member: did they want to vote for cheaper electricity or did they want to vote for higher energy prices? Those in the opposition voted for higher energy prices. They voted against price relief for families in their own electorates. Then they come in here with stories about their constituents, and never do they say that they have explained to those constituents or to businesses that they voted against energy price relief. They simply ignore the fact that, when they were asked to act and to do their fundamental job of voting for legislation in this place, they chose not to vote for energy price relief. I know that we have some fantastic speakers on this MPI coming—maybe not on that side, but I'm pretty confident on this side. As to some of the other things that have been achieved, I want to commend the work that the member for Macquarie has done in making sure that we once again value our arts and creative industries. I commend her and the minister for their work on the Revive cultural policy, a fantastic piece of work that had been missing for 10 years. We didn't have a national cultural policy. We didn't get rid of it; I don't know who did. But I'm pleased that we have a government that once again believes in making sure we have a proper cultural policy with new money. I want to commend the work of the member for Jagajaga, who's been out there campaigning for cheaper child care. She knows it's not just about helping families with cost of living; it's about investing in our children and the productivity of our economy. She's been a leading campaigner for that. I want to commend the work of the member for Lalor, as the Chief Government Whip, who has made sure so much of the government's legislative agenda when it comes to Jobs and Skills Australia, to those 20,000 university places, to legislation to open the doors of opportunity—again, people on this side are committed to making sure— An opposition member: Give the member for Hunter a rap! Mr GORMAN 74519 I will give the member for Hunter a rap. He never left a trillion dollars of debt! The member for Hunter didn't spend $3.4 billion on submarines that were never built. He's never spent a billion dollars on government advertising. He is a fantastic advocate for his region, and he is also a strong advocate for manufacturing jobs. He has been, in this place, time and time again, asking those opposite to back the National Reconstruction Fund so that we can once again back manufacturing in this country, as opposed to those opposite— (Time expired) 15:31 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I can see some very big smiles—and so there should be—on some of the backbenchers opposite, because that was a woeful performance and there will be some opportunities open up the front benches after that terrible performance by the assistant minister. When you get an opportunity to talk about what your government has done in the first 10 months of its operation, you'd think you would spend some time saying with pride what you think the government has done. In that woeful performance he spent about 7½ to eight minutes having a crack at the other side—and some of it was on stuff from 10 years ago. There were some big smiles on some faces on the backbench because that was woeful. Let's go to the first 10 months of this government's performance, which, as well, has been woeful. I'm going to start with one thing that is quite traumatic; I feel very strongly about this. When the Prime Minister says it's been a pretty good 10 months, it hasn't been a pretty good 10 months in those remote communities where the cashless welfare card has been removed. The cashless welfare card was having some real practical impacts on the ground. I know one of the communities quite well and have been to one of those communities quite a lot as well. Those communities were telling me they did think the cashless welfare card was working, and the stats prove it. Since that cashless welfare card has been removed from some of those remote and regional communities, domestic violence is up, child abuse is up— A government member: Where's the source! Mr HOGAN 218019 I take that interjection. I say: talk to the communities. I'm quite shocked about the ideology of those opposite. Their blind ideology means women are getting raped and children are getting bashed that weren't beforehand— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The member for Lalor, on a point of order? Ms Ryan 249224 I would ask the member to withdraw. Mr HOGAN 218019 I will not withdraw. I encourage the member for Lalor, at 10 o'clock on Monday morning— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 It would— Mr HOGAN 218019 to come to a meeting. I will tell the member where the meeting is, and the people at that meeting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Excuse me! Member for Page, it would assist the House— Mr HOGAN 218019 I will not withdraw. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Would you like to defy the ruling of the chair? Mr HOGAN 218019 I am not going to withdraw that statement. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Then you are moving dissent from my ruling. Is that what you're moving? I think you should consider your situation. It would be a courtesy to the House if you would withdraw. Mr HOGAN 218019 I will withdraw as a courtesy to you, Deputy Speaker. But I invite the member for Lalor, on Monday morning at 10 o'clock, to come to a meeting where there will be representatives of those communities who will be talking about the real impact of it. I invite you to come to that meeting if you so wish. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Excuse me! The member has withdrawn his statement, but do you have another point of order? Ms Ryan 249224 I'm happier with an unconditional withdrawal. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 No. I have accepted there has been a withdrawal, and— Mr Hogan 218019 I withdraw it. Th e DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Page, I am listening very, very carefully. Mr HOGAN 218019 And I invite the other members opposite who said where are you getting this information from or these statistics from. I will spread the information about where this meeting is at 10 o'clock on Monday morning. There are going to be community members from these communities who will tell their stories, and I will invite you to come. It will be interesting to see which of you members do turn up to that who don't believe what's been going on in these communities. Again, I think the blind ideology that you have had about that card has caused great distress in those communities, and I think it certainly hasn't been a pretty good 10 months for those communities. Obviously that topic has taken up more time than I thought it would, but there are other things I do wish to mention very briefly. This government said that its energy policy was the most modelled policy by an opposition in history. The Ukraine war had started, when they came into government, and they were saying they were going to lower everyone's electricity bills. Again, it hasn't been a good 10 months for anyone who has to pay an energy bill. The mortgages—they actually said mortgages would be lower under them when they came into government, and, again, it hasn't been a great 10 months for any mortgage repayment person in this country. So there's a lot that this government has to be ashamed of in its first 10 months. 15:47 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga I am more than happy to spend a Thursday afternoon standing up here talking about what this government has achieved over the last 10 months, because I have to tell you there has been a big change both in this place and outside of this place. Still, when I'm in my community and talking to people, it is absolutely the case that people walk up to me and say, 'Look, I just want to say: you guys are doing a really good job,' or, 'I just want to say, it's so impressive having the adults in charge again. I just want to say how refreshing that feels.' So that's what is happening in our community at the moment, and it's happening because this government is getting on with the job of all the things that those opposite ignored, and not just ignored for 10 months; they ignored them for nearly 10 years! There is no clearer example of this than those opposite's drift and denial when it comes to climate change. Deputy Speaker, I cannot tell you how many times people in my community came up to me in despair under the previous government, in absolute despair about where this country was heading, in absolute despair about the future of their children, of this country and of our entire world, because what they could see was that nothing was happening—absolutely nothing under those opposite. Those opposite don't even believe climate change is real. The member for New England has made that very, very clear. So, as a result of all of that, this government came in with a very big task, and we have been getting on with it. In the last 10 months, our government has delivered this country's first real climate change policy in a decade. That is a massive achievement. We know we haven't got it all done yet. We know how much there is still to do, but we are on the right track. We are on the track that gives this country a future, which helps build the jobs and the industries of the future, which helps make sure that we are a clean, green energy superpower. Over the past 10 years—10 months! Not 10 years. Over the past 10 months— Ms Payne 144732 It feels like 10 years with all the things we've done. Ms THWAITES 282212 As the member for Canberra says, it feels like 10 years because we've been so busy. We have been so busy over the last 10 months— Mr McCormack 219646 Tell us how good you are! Ms THWA 282212 That's what I am here to do. You invited it this afternoon. I am absolutely here to tell you how good we. That is exactly the topic you gave us; thank you. One of the other areas that our government has brought a real focus to over the last 10 months is transparency, accountability and honesty. Again, if I look at things people in my community were saying to me before the last election that they were so concerned about, they were about how this place operates. They were about whether they could trust the people in this place and those in charge. And what have we done since we were elected? We've delivered the National Anti-corruption Commission that those opposite could not deliver. They promised, but they did not deliver. We know that Australians want those in power in our country to be held to account. We know that they want those of us in here to behave to the highest possible standards, and that's what we have been getting on with. We're making lives fairer and more equal for Australian women. We've put gender equality at the heart of our work, delivering cheaper child care, the biggest boost to paid parental leave since the scheme was introduced, a record investment to improve women's safety, gender responsive budgeting and great work in women's health—such important work. I'm going to close on one of the most important things our government has been doing in the last 10 months, and that's the work we are doing to advance an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to this place. Just today we have seen the Prime Minister unveil what the question will look like. This is such a massive opportunity for our country. I want to commend all the people who have done the work to get us to this point. I want to encourage all Australians to take up the opportunity that is now before us, to turn a new page in our country's story, to walk forward together and to embrace what it means to have the oldest living continuing culture in our country. It is a huge, exciting opportunity. I'm so proud to be part of a government that is doing this together with our country for our country. 15:41 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina In AHistory of Delusions, author Victoria Shepherd takes readers back hundreds of years to investigate extraordinary and well documented cases of delusion. But she doesn't need to look back over hundreds of years of history; she only needs to look at those opposite, because to think that the past 10 months has been anything but chaotic is, quite frankly, delusional. In this interesting book, and as the Washington Post's Lucinda Robb in her wonderful review writes: It is quite a cast of characters. There is the clockmaker who thought his head had been chopped off and accidentally swapped for another (he wanted his original—and much better—teeth back). A London tea-broker interrupted Parliament to warn that a gang of villains was using a device called an "Air-Loom" to control the minds of British politicians— Maybe there's somebody out there who's doing that to those who are writing the talking points for those opposite! The review continues: A middle-aged housewife, immortalized in medical history as Madame M, showed up at a Parisian police station to report that her entire family had been replaced by doubles— That could have happened to those opposite too! Indeed, although the Prime Minister says it has been a pretty good 10 months, he didn't actually say it's been an outstanding 10 months, because he knows it hasn't. In his heart of hearts, he knows that it hasn't. Certainly it hasn't. If he and those opposite believe otherwise, they belong in the next chapter of history's most famous people who are delusional. It certainly hasn't been a pretty good 10 months for farmers, who, thanks to the Minister for the Environment and Water, are now faced with buybacks in the river communities. They are not saying that it's been a pretty good 10 months. It certainly hasn't been a pretty good 10 months for businesses and families, because every time they turn on a power switch, they're paying more on their power bills. Indeed, we heard on 97 occasions that there was going to be a $275 cut to those bills. Where is that cut? Of course, it's delusional. It is delusional of those opposite, but they won't even mention the $275. Oh, no, you don't hear them mention that figure anymore, because it has been wiped from their talking points. It was in their talking points. Mr McCORMACK 219646 I hear the member for Hunter. It was in his talking points when he was running for that seat, but it's not there now. You won't hear them say $275, because they know they duped the Australian public. Indeed, it hasn't been a good 10 months for those communities which had the cashless debit card. I know the member for Page mentioned this, but the cashless debit card had led to better communities. It had led to better outcomes. Certainly, the Aboriginal people who live in those remote communities were getting better outcomes from the cashless debit card, and that has been taken away. That is indeed so sad. It hasn't been a 'pretty good 10 months' for truckies. I acknowledge the frontline medical professionals—the nurses and the doctors—and everyone else who played a part in saving lives during COVID, but it was the truckies who transported the vaccines and the personal protection equipment around the country and who did so much to keep the toilet rolls supplied when everybody thought they needed 10 toilet rolls every time they went to the loo. They were the real unsung heroes of the global pandemic right here in Australia. I was the minister who put the national transport freight logistics code in place—in hours, not weeks, months or whatever the case might be—with the state ministers, albeit some were Labor, and I thank them again. That's what the truckies did, and what are they getting in return? A 10 per cent rise in a truckie tax that they don't want, they don't need, they don't deserve and they certainly didn't expect. 'It's been a pretty good 10 months,' the Prime Minister says—not at all! It hasn't been a good 10 months, not for families, not for business, not for farmers, not for truckies and not for remote Aboriginal communities. If this is what Labor is going to do in the first 10 months of government, then goodness knows what's going to come in the future. But Australians are onto this government; they know that they have been duped. They won't be duped again. They won't be duped twice. They won't be misled twice when they hear Labor candidates saying, 'We're going to cut your power bills,' because we know that under Labor you always pay more. 15:46 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor I'd like to thank the member for Hume for the matter of public importance today, noting of course that the member for Hume didn't stay for the discussion—nor did the member for Page stay for the discussion. I'd like to thank the colleagues on this side of the House who are here for the discussion and who've stayed for the discussion because we take our jobs in this place seriously. Five minutes is sometimes a long time in this place—as the member for Riverina leaves after his long five-minute contribution. Five minutes is a long time sometimes in this place, and 10 months can go just like that. And 10 years? Ten years can do so much damage. We've had 10 years of a government that refused to acknowledge the need for action on climate change—so much damage. We've had 10 years of a government that refused to see education as an investment, seeing it only as a cost, and then chose to fund the private sector more than the public sector. We've had 10 years of a government that oversaw a rise in the cost of child care to 49 per cent, as we heard today from the education minister, a government which should be responsible for these things. We've had 10 years of a government under which the Australian public lost faith in the integrity of this place. We've had 10 years of a government that didn't come into this place every day with a razor-sharp focus on the Australian public and on building back confidence and belief in our domestic conventions and institutions. In 10 months, this government has been focused on all of those things. It was 10 years of a government that cared so little about the cost of living for those who had ever accessed social security that it thought it was appropriate to introduce an unlawful system that targeted some of our most vulnerable. It wasn't just our most vulnerable that were targeted; it was young people. The government targeted people who had been students. People had accessed our safety net to support themselves while they were studying, only to find, as I did, sitting with many of them in my electorate, that when they got their first job they were hit with an unlawful and wrong robodebt. People were told, through the issuing of that debt and the skitching of debt collectors after them, that they had done something wrong. I said to young people in my electorate, 'You need to fight this, because in paying it back you're acknowledging that you defrauded the Commonwealth, when in fact you did not.' That's the government we had for 10 years, and in 10 months this government has worked solidly on the commitments that we took to the election to rebuild the faith of the Australian public in this institution, to rebuild the faith of the Australian public that a federal government can exist and can do things about the cost-of-living crisis as well as introduce the things we promised to do. That's what this government is about. We can say they've been a good 10 months because what we've done in those 10 months is deliver on our promises. Cheaper childcare was a commitment. It's also a cost-of-living relief. Mr McCormack 219646 And power prices? Ms RYAN 249224 I hear the interjection about power prices from over there. You know what this government sees? This government sees every challenge in this country as an opportunity, and the challenge of climate change is an opportunity to become a clean, green energy superpower. That's how this government sees the world. Every challenge is an opportunity. When we were elected only to find the hidden promise was a great increase in power prices, did we shirk it? No, we confronted it. We say: 'There's a challenge. What will we do about that? Let me think—we'll bring parliament back and we'll do something to support those families. We'll bring in legislation to this place and not waste a minute, not say it's close to Christmas, we'll deal with that in January.' No, no, no. We brought parliament back to pass legislation, only to find that in these 10 months those opposite couldn't bring themselves to support the Australian public and to support this government. We've been a good government because we've got on with the job. (Time expired) 15:51 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes I rise to speak on the matter of public importance brought by my colleague the member for Hume today, and I thank him for bringing this matter to the House. The Prime Minister's claimed that Australians have had a pretty good 10 months, but I'm yet to have any Australian, besides maybe some of those that sit opposite us, saying to me that they have had a pretty good 10 months. Nobody in my electorate of Hughes has come to me to say, 'I've had a really good 10 months', or even a pretty good 10 months. Instead, I'm hearing that on average in my electorate they are now paying almost $2,000 a month more on mortgages—and 30 per cent of my electorate still have a mortgage. What impact does this have on small businesses in my electorate and small businesses throughout Australia? Small businesses in my electorate are saying many things. Cafe owners will say: 'People used to come in and buy two cups of coffee. Now they're cutting down to one.' A local beautician in Sutherland only two weeks ago said to me: 'Discretionary spend is down. People are no longer coming in and getting the same amount of services that they used to get.' Cafe owners again have said: 'We used to have the Tuesday lunch crowd that used to come in. Now they're coming in and having coffees instead.' That is having a direct impact on small businesses, which has a flow-on impact on employment and on my electorate of Hughes. I ask that the Prime Minister explain which Australians he was referring to when he said Australians have had a pretty good 10 months. He's refused to answer questions this week about it. I asked the Prime Minister a question about the closure of what used to be a local institution in the Sutherland shire. This was an Italian restaurant, Caruso's. They closed their doors at the beginning of March and said they were closing their doors because of the escalating costs of power and the other living costs that have increased so much over the last 10 months. They'd been in business for 17 years, and now they've closed their doors and people have lost their jobs. Families, over the past 10 months, have had nine consecutive rate rises under this government. I don't know how it can be said that Australians have had a pretty good 10 months. It just does not make sense. Older Australians having to choose between heating and eating would not agree with the Prime Minister's assertion that Australians have had a pretty good 10 months. Parents that are having to make tough choices about their budgets wouldn't say it's been a pretty good 10 months. And we just keep saying it. I will draw some direct quotes from the Prime Minister. Indeed, at the Labor launch on 1 May last year he said: … as your Prime Minister—I won't run from responsibility. I won't treat every crisis as a chance to blame someone else. I will show up, I will step up, I will bring people together. What a beautiful statement. Ten months down the track that has not occurred. On 11 April last year on ABC News Breakfast, he said, 'I will take responsibility. I'll show leadership. I'll deal with the challenges. And there are also opportunities that we can seize.' At a Sydney press conference on 10 April last year he said: I think that Australians want a government that does its job, that doesn't always blame someone else, that accepts responsibility. So why do we hear now that the increase in power prices is because of the war in Ukraine, for example? This Prime Minister, this government, continue to blame somebody else, even a war overseas, for problems within Australia that they simply cannot fix, that they do not have answers for. Under this government and under Labor governments forever Australian families, Australian businesses, Australians always pay more under Labor. 15:56 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie What a difference 10 months makes. Ten months ago people were talking to me about how anxious they were that Australia would never take action on climate change. Ten months ago people were talking to me about aged care and the conditions people were facing. Ten months ago people were talking to me about their concerns about being able to follow the career they wanted because of concerns about TAFE. Ten months ago the world was a different place, and it was not a better place, because of the policies that those opposite had pursued for a decade. It was a decade of not valuing education. It was a decade of not valuing early education and recognising that the support we give our young people as their brains are developing in the preschool years is crucial. Not only that, but not supporting families meant that women weren't able to get back into the workforce in the way that they wanted to. When I look back 10 months ago and think of the myriad of problems people were experiencing and raising with me—even I felt overwhelmed by the job that we would have if we won the election. And it turns out clearly we did win the election. I have been blown away by the determination of the ministers, the assistant ministers and the special envoys that we have. I have been blown away by the determination that has been shown to work methodically through, supported by, and I include myself in this, a terrific team of backbenchers. I literally just looked at an email that had come through from a constituent. He's a constituent who doesn't always agree with me about things, but the words he used were: 'You've had a terrific first 10 months.' In fact, he thought it was a year, so he thinks we've been here a year. The keywords were: 'and you seem determined to press on', and that is what we're doing on this side of the House. We don't look at a problem and go, 'Oh, let's pretend it's not there because it might go away.' We don't ignore things. We don't ignore the fact that climate change is wreaking havoc on our community. Members across there know the experience I have had in my electorate and the experience my constituents have gone through, not just in the last couple of years, but back, just when they were elected in 2013, when bushfires swept through Winmalee and Mount Victoria. We know that this government was aware there were some issues, but what did they do? Absolutely nothing. By contrast, every time we've seen a problem—some of them we knew about before the election. Others have emerged. Some were hidden from us, like the reality of what the power increases would be. That was hidden, not just from us but from the Australian people before the election. But we don't go, 'Oh, let's pretend—la, la, la—it's not really happening.' We tackle the issues, methodically working through them and collaboratively working through them. That's a word those opposite should look up in a dictionary and really embrace. We're collaborating across this parliament, wherever there is a willingness to do so. Every day you see evidence of that as we pass our legislation through this place. I'm not going to have time, in the minute and 10 seconds that remains, to talk through all the things we've passed, but let's just take a look at a few of them. We now have a National Anti-Corruption Commission, about to start its work. In 100 days, we will have cheaper child care. That is economic micro reform. For many families that's going to transform their ability to work. We have made medicines cheaper. They are cheaper now. It's cheaper when you go to get a script filled, whether you're a pensioner, whether you're on a seniors health card or whether you're not on any of those. What's more, there are more people who have access to that seniors health card. We did it. We have 10 days paid family and domestic violence leave. It's there and operating. There's an electric vehicle discount that's been legislated. It's now law. We have made more changes in 10 months than those opposite could even imagine. What would have happened had they still been sitting on this bench? Absolutely nothing. 16:01 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson Today I'd like to speak about the Prime Minister's claim that Australians have had a pretty good 10 months. This claim is extraordinary. It's astonishing. It's remarkable. But the problem with it is that it's fictitious, because it just ain't true. I don't know anyone who's better off than they were 10 months ago. I don't know any Australian who is. It is absolutely unbelievable. There are rising insurance costs, rising fuel costs, rising power prices and rising mortgages, and the list just goes on. What about Lee, my constituent, whose home is in Mackay but who is currently in the Townsville hospital fighting an aggressive cancer? He has been there since January receiving chemo treatment, unable to work, with no income protection insurance and 400 kilometres away from his wife, children and support network. This family is suffering from financial stress and, on top of Lee's medical costs, they are facing the pressures of rising living costs. These should not be Lee's worries to have at the moment. His priority should be his health and winning his fight against cancer. I came to this place to make a difference. I came to this place to serve the people of Dawson, who were already going pretty well under the coalition—as a matter of fact, very well. But what I'm asking for is: can those opposite actually honour some of their commitments, because my people of Dawson are hurting? Rising mortgage costs and rising power costs are hurting my people. Unfortunately, I can't do anything about that from this stage, because I'm on the opposition. But I'm pleading with you folks, from the goodness of your hearts, to please help my people out and address the rising cost of living. Take Ben, for example. Ben's a constituent of mine, and his business is refrigerated transport and refrigerated cold stores. His model is that he picks up fruit and vegetables from growers, takes them back to his place, cools them in the cold stores and then forwards them on using bigger trucks. He's rung me and said: 'Andrew, I cannot afford the rates that these electricity prices are going up by. I cannot make that work and, more importantly, I can't pass those costs on because my people simply cannot afford it.' He goes: 'What do I do? Also, can you tell me what happened to the $275 reduction in power prices that Labor promised before the election?' He is actually blown away by this, and so am I. So, what is Labor's answer to this? It's to put price caps on electricity and gas prices. Now, hasn't that worked a treat! I'm proud that I voted against that, because ever since that happened prices have only been going up. It's simple economics. Look at what's happening with gas. When you look at the supply and demand situation, what you need to do to reduce the price is put more gas into the system. But, no. And I'll tell you what for those opposite: you've already had your sugar hit. If it hasn't worked so far, you wait to see what's going to happen in the future. No-one's investing in gas anymore because you have taken their certainty away. It's just simple economics. You need to get on board with this. And the mortgage— Honourable members interjecting— Mr WILLCOX 286535 Oh, yes, renewables. Don't they work well! I'll take the interjection. More unreliable and useless technology. Thank you very much. But in 10 short months, the trails of broken promises are everywhere to be seen. The $275 power relief—broken promise. No changes in superannuation—broken promise. A 24/7 registered nurse in all aged-care facilities—broken promise. No changes to the franking credits—broken promise. 'Your mining jobs will be safe'—you used to back the miners, or you used to back in the day, but now not at all. You back your old mates the Greens. What a turnout! You've turned your back on the people who have always supported you. What a turnout. Absolutely unbelievable. As you can see history shows Labor are very good at making promises, they're just not good at keeping them. Australians are not better off under this Albanese Labor government. Australians always pay more under Labor. 16:06 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra I want to thank those opposite for bringing on this matter of public importance today that gives us an opportunity to talk about the first 10 months of the Albanese Labor government. I wish I had more than five minutes to talk about the changes that we have delivered, the changes for Australians that, in 10 months, are making such a difference. It's an interesting strategy from those opposite. I don't quite understand it, but I'm happy to speak on it. When I talk to people in my community of Canberra, there is a palpable sigh of relief. A number of people have approached me and said, 'We are just so happy with the change of government.' There is a change of mood in this place. We'd come in here crying out for action on a whole range of issues—on climate change, on age care, on cost of living—all of these things that are so important to my constituents and all Australians—that the previous government took absolutely no responsibility for. As the member for Lalor was just saying, when we see a challenge now, we confront it. That is what government is about. We approach things by taking responsibility and getting on with the job. I'd like to talk about a few of the key achievements in our first 10 months in government. As I said, I've only got five minutes, so I won't get to talk about them. In our first 10 months of government, we have established the National Anti-Corruption Commission—another thing that those opposite failed to deliver, even though they promised to do it. They never even introduce the legislation. We have passed a climate change bill and updated our climate targets, and at the moment we are trying to get through this House, in a very consultative manner, the very important safeguard mechanism that will begin transitioning our economy to a low-emissions economy and getting us to our target of net zero by 2050. We are making child care cheaper and in 100 days time over a million Australian families will be better off with this policy—including so many in Canberra who struggle with some of the highest childcare costs in the country. We have made medicines cheaper. We have introduced legislation to expand paid parental leave. We have secured an increase in the minimum wage and a pay rise for aged-care workers—a much deserved and overdue pay rise. We have passed legislation to get wages moving. We have advanced a Voice to parliament, and I'm incredibly proud to be part of a government taking this on and getting it done. Today, giving the wording of the question that we will take to a referendum is an incredibly important moment for Australia. It's an opportunity to walk forward in reconciliation. The previous government initially sounded like, maybe, they were going to do it—and just shirked it. We established a royal commission into robodebt. We are repairing our international relations. We have created 180,000 new fee-free TAFE places and are delivering 20,000 new university places. We have established 10 days paid family and domestic violence leave, one of our first actions in government, because no-one should face the choice of their job or their safety. We convened a Jobs and Skills Summit. We established Jobs and Skills Australia. We ended the cashless debit card, expanded the Commonwealth seniors health card and delivered the Regional First Home Buyer Guarantee. We've made it easier for pensioners to earn more without losing their pension and have acted to take the sting out of energy prices and ensure bill relief. We've green-lighted over $16 billion in renewable energy infrastructure in New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania through Rewiring the Nation. We've introduced the first cultural policy in a decade, which we didn't even have under the previous government because they simply didn't care about the arts and culture in this country. I am very proud of that. Yesterday we announced Australia's first endometriosis and pelvic pain GP clinics across the country, including one right here in the ACT. I was very proud to join the minister for that announcement. And, very importantly, for the people of the ACT and the Northern Territory, we allowed the debate on restoring territory rights, something the previous government would not do. It enabled the member for Solomon and me to bring a private member's bill and ensure that our constituents have the same democratic rights now as those in the rest of the country. So I am very, very proud of our first 10 months of a government that is making the changes that matter for Australians—as Labor governments always do. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The discussion is now concluded. BILLS 73 BILLS Australia Council Amendment (Creative Australia) Bill 2023, Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Information Disclosure, National Interest and Other Measures) Bill 2022 73

Australia Council Amendment (Creative Australia) Bill 2023

Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Information Disclosure, National Interest and Other Measures) Bill 2022

Returned from Senate 73 Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Closing the Gender Pay Gap) Bill 2023 73

Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Closing the Gender Pay Gap) Bill 2023

First Reading 73 Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 73

Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022

Second Reading 73 16:13 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell Prior to being interrupted, I was in the process of speaking about the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 and saying how important it was that we pass this bill, because it's designed to reinforce the principles of responsible government. I wanted to highlight how important honesty, integrity and accountability are to the proper functioning of our democratic government. They are important everywhere and to almost all Australians, but we feel this particularly keenly in my electorate of Calwell. Calwell is one of the many outer suburban electorates around Australia with a very high proportion of citizens and residents who were born overseas. Many of those who have migrated to our great country have come as refugees or as people wanting to escape war, corruption, persecution or just general chaos in the countries they've left behind. They come to Australia with high hopes of stability, a healthy democracy and a system that makes sense and works as it was intended—where there are no secrets, no handshakes behind closed doors, no rules that apply to some but not all. A government that uses its power and position to mislead, to subvert longstanding conventions and to avoid proper scrutiny is not what we hold up as an Australian standard to any of our citizens, longstanding or recent. I get the opportunity, like most members in this place, to attend citizenship ceremonies. In my electorate, they are happening in the dozens, literally. There are so many people becoming new citizens. It's fortunate that the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs is in the chamber today, because I get the opportunity to read out his message. I was going to quote from the message, but I think I'm just going to read it into Hansard because it speaks a lot about the values that we— An honourable member: It starts with 'thank you'. Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT It starts with a 'thank you'. It also tells newly admitted citizens that they are now living in a democracy and that they are joining a community that has high standards and high values. It says: Thank you for deciding to become an Australian citizen. Today you join a nation that is one of the world's most successful multicultural societies, with around half of all Australians either born overseas, or with at least one parent born overseas. In Australia, everyone can be proud of who they are—and everyone should be respected, valued and feel a sense of belonging. We are privileged to share this beautiful country with the world's oldest continuing culture. This is a fundamental part of who we are. For more than 60,000 years First Nations peoples have cared for country. Appreciating and understanding this truth, is a vital part of what it means to be Australian. Australians are united by our shared commitment to democracy and the rule of law, and to freedom of speech, religion and association. Our diversity is our greatest strength, and we prosper by embracing this. We believe in a society in which everyone is equal, regardless of their gender, faith, sexual orientation, age, ability, race, national or ethnic origin. Ours is the land of the fair go, in which respect and compassion underpin our care for each other and our willingness to reach out to those around us in times of need. By becoming an Australian citizen, you make a commitment to these values, and to contribute to our evolving Australian story. And, of course, on behalf of the Australian government we congratulate everyone. Our democracy is precious, and we cannot take it for granted. Central to protecting our democracy is enshrining transparency, accountability and the public's right to know. As the Solicitor-General stated: … 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. This amendment is one important step in restoring the Australian people's confidence in our federal system of government, and it will help to ensure greater transparency and accountability and will implement the first of the six recommendations from the Bell inquiry. It is a step in the rebuilding of integrity in public sector institutions and programs, and I look forward to a strengthened relationship of trust between government and nation through the proper functioning of parliament and executive across all areas of public policy and service delivery. I commend this bill to the House. 16:18 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin It's a pleasure to join this very important debate on the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2022 and a particular pleasure to follow my friend the member for Calwell. I might return to her remarks shortly. But I want to start by recognising that during the course of the pandemic something quite remarkable happened—something remarkable and important but also precious—and that is that we saw an increase in trust in our politics and in our democratic institutions as people appreciated how vital it was to have a functioning democracy, a functioning parliament and, of course, a functioning government. This turned around a trend that had beset Australia and, indeed, most advanced democracies for quite some time. To see people feel the absolutely fundamental importance of government as a force for good in our lives and a necessary force in hard times is something that I hope every member in this place and the other place takes very seriously. But this trend, unfortunately, proved to be somewhat illusory. It was a light at the end of the tunnel but turned out to be a train in the form of the Morrison government—in particular some of the decision-making of the former Prime Minister the member for Cook. The actions that give rise to the necessity of adopting this bill into law really go to the heart of our democratic system, our system of responsible government, as the Solicitor-General has highlighted and as other members, in making their contribution to this debate, have touched upon. What happened in secret ripped apart the very core of our democratic traditions in Australia and denied that sense of trust and confidence in government that should be so important to everyone in this place. The 151 members of the House of Representatives bring to this place their values, their sense of how the world is and how the world should be. I'm sure all of us bring to it a sincere appreciation of our duty not just to represent our constituents but also to make the case for our view of the world, to be part of a democratic conversation. That is something that we clearly can't take for granted, because it has been undermined absolutely fundamentally. That is why this bill is so important, and I'm pleased to join so many of my colleagues not only in committing to vote for the Ministers of State Amendment Bill but in placing on the record my very serious view about the need for this bill. Perhaps we shouldn't see the need for such a bill. Perhaps it's understandable that, over the course of the 120-odd years of our Commonwealth parliamentary democracy, no-one previously thought that it could be required, because it is absolutely extraordinary that a prime minister would commission, or cause to be commissioned, ministers into office without informing the public, without informing his colleagues around the cabinet table and without informing the parliament. I'm very honoured—it is the greatest honour of my working life—to be appointed as a minister in the Albanese government. It's a responsibility I take seriously, and I know all of my colleagues in the executive—I see the member for Fenner here too—take this responsibility, this privilege, this duty, very seriously. I think about that not only broadly, as having the opportunity to make decisions as part of executive government, but particularly in the context of the responsibilities that I have as a minister in the home affairs department, as the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. I'm very conscious that I'm granted, through the Migration Act, a number of discretionary powers—discretionary powers that only a minister in the home affairs department can rely upon. These powers are pretty significant in the lives of individuals but also insofar as our national interest is upheld and preserved. It is absolutely extraordinary that there could be uncertainty as to which members of a government could be entrusted such sweeping discretionary powers. It's particularly extraordinary that the minister who quite rightly regarded herself as being sworn in to oversight this had absolutely no idea that others had recourse to these powers. The line of thinking about what could have happened and how the rights of individuals and our national interest could have been undermined through this uncertainty is quite terrifying. This is one example, out of many, of the democratic and real-life consequences of the practices undertaken by the member for Cook which would be redressed quickly through the enactment of this bill—a bill that should surely be supported by every member and senator in this place. Amongst my responsibilities, as my friend the member for Calwell noted, I am privileged to be the minister for citizenship, and part of that privilege is providing the minister's message, a message on behalf of the Australian government, to our newest Australians. I thank the member for Calwell for the courtesy and kindness she's just extended to me. Part of that message, of course, talks about the common bonds that we share as Australians. Fundamental to that is an appreciation of our commitment to democracy and the rule of law. How ironic that the leader of Australia's government could so profoundly undermine both of those fundamental Australian values! It goes deeper than that, actually, because those people who become Australian citizens sit a citizenship test. A big part of that citizenship test, as all members would be well aware, involves members—prospective citizens, rather, but they may be prospective members of this place too!—being tested on their understanding of the rule of law, democracy and our system of government and the law. How ironic that a former prime minister who was also a former minister responsible for immigration and citizenship—although he didn't talk too much about those responsibilities; everything seemed to be an on-water matter in those days—could so profoundly undermine that. How shocking—and in a majority migrant nation, too. I believe having this process of building on our shared understanding of what it means to be Australian is an important part of building a stronger nation. The very least the government can do is seek to support those shared aspirations and seek to build a stronger understanding about how our democratic systems work, and, indeed, how they might work better—not undermine them. The contrast between the attitude of the former government, in particular the member for Cook, and the government led by Anthony Albanese could not be greater. This government has a big agenda, and the last 10 months have demonstrated that. The member for Canberra set out in a short contribution a very effective highlights reel of some of the substantive achievements—the things that are changing the lives of individual Australians for the better and changing our country for the better, too. I think about those things; I think about each and every one of them. But the bigger thing is rebuilding the sense that politics matters, eroding the corrosive cynicism that pervades so many in our communities who don't believe that our democracy is working as it should. It's a cynicism, unfortunately, that is shared not only by those who are clearly at the very top of the former government but by members who still sit opposite, who clearly do not have the courage of their convictions and who do not believe that we can have a democratic system anchored in strong institutions, institutions that are about transparency and integrity, so that the accountability that is fundamental to our system of government can be maintained, so that every member of our community can have trust and confidence in our system of government. We are doing so much as a government to rebuild trust and confidence in Australian democracy. But that begins with the passage of this bill, making it very clear who is entrusted on behalf of the Australian people to undertake executive office so that they can be held to account—including, of course, in this place, every sitting day, in question time. It shouldn't be a difficult proposition for this to be clearly set out to every member of the Australian community—indeed, to every member of this place: to whom they should be addressing their questions and their concerns, and of whom they can demand answers. That should be a pretty fundamental principle. I am disappointed that we've seen very few contributions from members opposite—again, with a couple of exceptions that recognise the importance of this. Beginning to restore trust and confidence rests in the passage of this bill, but that isn't the whole of the task that's before us. I'm so pleased that, after prevarication and, again, more of the cynicism that so characterised the administration of the member for Cook, we now have a national anticorruption commission. We now have, in this jurisdiction, to go with the other eight jurisdictions in Australia, a mechanism where people who make decisions over the lives of others can be properly held to account. People can be properly held to account for their bureaucratic decision-making, and people such as me and Minister McBain here can be held to account in this place, as we should be, with people knowing exactly what it is we are charged to be responsible for. It shouldn't be hard for that to be accepted as a basic standard. When we think about building trust and confidence in politics, there is a big step forward that we are about to embark upon as a nation—that is, to recognise in our Constitution our First Peoples. I think we can all be proud of the work that's been led by Minister Burney, championed by the Prime Minister, and so many others in putting forward to the Australian people a proposition that answers the very generous gesture put together in the Uluru Statement from the Heart so that we can complete our national birth certificate and ensure that debate in this place and in government is informed by the perspective of First Nations people—another very big step towards this. Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 76 ADJOURNMENT Brisbane: Infrastructure 76 16:30 Mr VASTA E0D Bonner I have a vision—a vision that would take trucks off Brisbane roads, making it safer for Brisbane families by reducing congestion, noise and air pollution; a vision that would bring thousands of job opportunities for locals; a vision that would strengthen our supply chain resilience and increase the export and import capabilities of local businesses; a vision that would revolutionise the Queensland economy and ensure that Queensland is brought into line with the world's best practice for freight. That vision is 'tunnel vision'. A dedicated tunnel connecting the Port of Brisbane to the Inland Rail would transform Brisbane into the logistics capital of Australia. In the 2022 financial year the Port of Brisbane, located in the north of my electorate of Bonner, contributed $7.8 billion to the Queensland economy. Along with its supply chain networks, the Port of Brisbane also supported 63,000 jobs, with 7,900 of those jobs directly within the port district. This is despite the Port of Brisbane currently running at 10 per cent capacity. Let me reiterate that: it is running at only 10 per cent capacity. Think of the billions of dollars, thousands of jobs and limitless business opportunities we are currently missing out on because the Port of Brisbane is running at only 10 per cent capacity. We are doing a disservice to current and future generations of Australians if we do not unlock the Port of Brisbane's economic potential. My 'tunnel vision' will help achieve this, by bringing our freight network into the 21st century. It has the added benefit of taking a predicted 13 million trucks off Brisbane roads by 2050. Currently 97 per cent of container freight that leaves the Port of Brisbane is by truck, causing increased road degradation, traffic congestion and noise and air pollution for Brisbane locals. Don't get me wrong; truckies are vital to our economy, and, without them, Australia would stop. We must always be thankful for our truckies. But the reality is: with the prediction of over 50 per cent of Queensland's population living in Brisbane by 2032, the city is becoming increasingly landlocked, and it will not be viable to have this many trucks on Brisbane roads. All it will do is cause more congestion, increase freight costs with time lost and put greater pressure on businesses and supply chains. 'Tunnel vision' is the best solution to get trucks off roads, whilst also causing the least disruption to family homes and our local environment. With fully electric locomotives, we will also ensure our future supply chains reduce their carbon footprint and eliminate the need for smokestacks in the tunnels. There is just one major problem, though: we are still waiting for the Queensland state government to release the Port of Brisbane Strategic Rail Access Study. On 17 February 2021 I wrote to the Queensland state Minister for Transport and Main Roads, urging him to release the study—a study that the former coalition government contributed $20 million to. It's over two years later, and this taxpayer funded report still has not been made public. This means that I, along with other MPs and councillors, cannot consult with our constituents and engage in community feedback. It means we cannot tell them exactly where the train lines will be and we cannot tell them how or if their homes will be impacted. Simply put, we are all in the dark. This is unfair and un-Australian. While there is no doubt that the cost of the tunnel will be in the billions, the 'tunnel vision' project is about leaving a legacy for future generations. This is about saying that we planned for their future; that, when we had the chance we took the trucks off the road and made the roads safer for families; that we protected our local environment; and that we planned for the future growth of Brisbane. We cannot wait; the time is now. I am calling on the state Labor government to release the Port of Brisbane Strategic Rail Access Study and help plan for a better future for all of Brisbane and, indeed, all of Australia. Illawarra Clean Energy Expo 76 16:35 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham On Monday night, here in Parliament House, we took Wollongong to the world, as the University of Wollongong and I hosted the inaugural Illawarra Clean Energy Expo. Although this building is the home of Australian democracy, on Monday you could feel the power of the Illawarra in the room. The atmosphere was absolutely electric. Special thanks must go to the university for working with me to make this concept a reality. A very, very special thank you to the key organisers: Vice-Chancellor Professor Patricia Davidson; Director of the Energy Futures Network, Ty Christopher; Director of Government Relations, Canio Fierravanti, who is well known in the corridors of Parliament House; and Heidi De Coster and her husband, Greg, from Protocol at the University of Wollongong. I would also like to thank and acknowledge the powerhouse of organisations that were present on Monday night. From BlueScope Steel, we had Iain McDonald, Manager, Carbon Abatement, Future Technologies and Sarah Ward, Manager, Climate Change Communications. From BOC gases, we had Chris Dolman, Daniel Mills and Vesna Olles. From Business Illawarra, we had Adam Zarth, who I work with quite often as well. From Ecojoule, we had Tony Ferguson and Mike Wishart. From Green Gravity, we had Tania Jones, Tim Robertson and Mark Swinnerton. From Gridsight, we had Brendan Banfield, Robyn Dawson and Brad Smith. From Hysata, we had Paul Barrett, Parchi Agrawal and Duncan Bremner. From I3net, we had Michelle Christodoulou. From Blend Esq, we had Robyn Johnson. From NSW Ports, we had Marika Calfas, the CEO, Paul Barrett, Campbell Mason and Greg Walls. From Oceanex, we had Tim Black, Tim Donnan, Jordan Glanville, Sarah Guilfoyle, Thomas Hansen and Karly Spronk. From Project and Portfolio Management, we had Rodger Bowman, Troy McDonald and Dorian Van Zyl. From Rewiring Australia, we had Kate Minter and Francis Veierboom. From South Coast Labour Council, we had Arthur Rorris. From Sicona, we had Christiaan Jordaan and Andrew Minett. From Squadron Energy, we had Jason Wiloughby, Ben Deer, Emma Leslie and Rochelle Macdonald. From Wise Energy, we had Michelle Hoess, Damian Vaquera, Brittney Woodgate and Alex Yates. And from Wollongong City Council, we had Mitch Golding and Mark Grimson. Finally, we had the fantastic exhibitors from the University of Wollongong which, as Minister Chris Bowen, said is an institution. It has used its nation-leading research facilities to put the Illawarra on the cutting edge of innovation that is being conducted through the Sustainable Buildings Research Centre, the School of Electrical, Computer and Telecommunications Engineering, ARC future grids training centre, the Australian Centre for Culture, Environment, Society and Space, the Australian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security, the Australian Power Quality and Reliability Centre, the Australian Institute for Innovative Materials and the Innovation and Commercial Research Unit. These facilities do some amazing work for our local area. Special mention should also go to Craig McLauchlan, Raad Raad, Kashem Muttaqi, Marjo Niemela, Chantel Carr, Natasha Larkin, Freya Croft, Camille Goodman, Zahra Shahbazian, Jason David, Sean Elphick and Jon Knott. The Illawarra's world-class innovation and expertise were demonstrated by a large attendance by Canberra's diplomatic community, all of whom were keen to learn, partner and collaborate on our expertise. We in the Illawarra are already changing our practices and reducing our emissions, introducing new technologies and activities to move quickly, efficiently and safely towards a clean energy future. The Australian government is investing in a range of projects with local partners, all meant to boost the Illawarra's preparedness for the changing energy future. Some of these include investing more than $1 million in a University of Wollongong study finding ways to keep Australia's grid secure; the Energy Future Skills Centre; the Renewable Energy Skills Training Centre at TAFE; $9 million for Hysata; 400 community batteries across the country, including one in Warrawong; and we're one of the first six proposed sides for offshore wind energy. We've also got more than 900 additional places at the University of Wollongong—an amazing contribution by the Albanese Labor government. Cost of Living 77 16:40 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume Sadly, it's getting harder by the day for hardworking Australian families to make ends meet under Labor. Under the Albanese government's watch, mortgage holders have suffered through nine consecutive interest rate increases. This is putting enormous pressure on everyday Australian families. When I get out and about, listening to communities right across this great country, the first thing that most people and businesses raise with me is how much harder life has become in the last 10 months. Life is particularly tough for the 800,000 families who currently have fixed mortgages who are about to go onto floating rates; we know they're going to see very sharp increases in their mortgage payments. In my home state of New South Wales 58 per cent of mortgage holders with a fixed rate will be rolling off those fixed rates this year—so a family with a typical mortgage of $750,000 will be slapped with $1,700 a month in increased mortgage payments overnight, as they go from fixed to floating rates. This could be enough to tip some over the edge. Let's not forget the soaring grocery bills and skyrocketing power bills. If you combine these together, the average New South Wales family with a mortgage could be slugged more than $23,000 a year in additional costs. It's just hard to fathom how they are going to find the money to pay those extra costs. That's almost $2,000 every month. This is the ugly reality of inflation under this government. Every day I hear stories of great sacrifices hardworking Australian families are having to make to pay bills and put food on the table for their children. Jason, from Robina, in the member for McPherson's electorate, has been forced to take on a second job because the time for cheap money is over. The father of two is also considering cuts to the family budget, including cancelling things like kids swimming lessons, TV subscriptions and going out on weekends. In my own electorate of Hume, small-business owner Kym, who runs at the famous Barenz restaurant in Camden, says he can already see the difference in customer behaviour caused by rising interest rates and soaring power bills: Patronage is definitely lower. You can see the pressures of cost of living and concerns about interest rate rises holding back every day spending. The little luxuries like hospitality get scaled back first. We know that won't be the end of it, but that's what goes first. In the member for Petrie's electorate, small-business owner Liz, from Flowerfusion, who I had the chance to meet recently in the Moreton Bay region, says cost of living is hitting her customers hard. She said she's starting to notice a huge drop in sales, particularly in the weeks the Reserve Bank has hiked interest rates. This is the reality. This is what is happening on the ground. Indeed, if you walk into any small business across Australia chances are that they will have stories just like this. Australian families are struggling, yet our Prime Minister wants to hide under the covers and pretend it's not happening. There are more people than ever seeking help from charity groups like Foodbank and the Cowra Information and Neighbourhood Centre in the member for Riverina's electorate, where I was recently. They're struggling to put food on the table. Many have no choice but to take on a second job, as I gave an example of earlier, so that they can pay the bills. Lifeline has, worryingly, seen an increase of 50 per cent in requests for help and support in relation to financial issues. The impact that this is having on people's lives and their mental health is frightening. When things get tough, Australians have no choice but to tighten their belts and manage their budgets. And that's exactly what the government should be doing to help them out, by taking pressure off interest rates and making sure it's not all just the Reserve Bank doing the work. There is currently more than $45 billion of extra spending from this government. That will only put extra upward pressure on interest rates for Australians. This is money going on the taxpayers' credit card. Australians will be paying the principal and the interest on it. We need this Prime Minister and this Treasurer focused on the issues that Australians care about, not their own favourite issues, not other issues, but on the cost of living and the real crisis we are seeing across our cities, our suburbs and our regions. Albanese Government: Health Care 78 16:45 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Many people in my electorate are rightly concerned about access to health care, particularly to see their GP. I want to thank everyone in my electorate who has contacted me about this, for sharing their concerns and experiences about accessing their GP and bulk billing services. I also want to thank those GPs who have explained to me how they feel burnt out and anxious over whether they can handle the enormous pressures of working in health care. I know that access to health care can have real impacts on people's health and life. A deferred trip to the GP because of cost or unavailability can mean serious consequences down the track. And, of course, it's not just individuals who suffer because of this. Health problems left unaddressed mean people struggle with coping with their lives. They are less able to work, to study, to care for children, to be productive. We didn't get here by chance. This has happened due to nine long years of Liberal government cuts and neglect regarding Medicare. It's never been harder or more expensive to see a doctor than it is now. The former government froze Medicare rebates for six years, ripping billions of dollars out of primary care and causing gap fees to skyrocket. It's not surprising that doctors are now leaving general practice in their droves. But, now that the grown-ups are back in charge, we are cleaning up the mess left by the Liberal coalition. Afterall, Labor is the party of Medicare. We created Medicare, and we will protect it. We're giving our doctors the resources to invest in their GP practices through a $220 million Strengthening Medicare—General Practice Grants Program. We are also investing $146 million to attract and retain more health workers in rural and regional Australian areas, like my electorate of Corangamite, with improved training and incentive programs. And we're reducing costs for people who are looking to study nursing. In our first budget, we cut the price of scripts for general patients by $12.50 a script. In September we cut the price of 2,000 brands of medicines, putting $130 million back into the pockets of hardworking Australians. In November we extended the Seniors Health Card to thousands and thousands more self-funded retirees so they'd get access to cheaper medicines as well. And, on 1 January, with our cheaper medicines policy, we delivered the biggest cut to the price of medicines in the 75-year history of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Already, in just the first 2½ months of the scheme, we've put $36 million back into the pockets of Australian patients. Locally, we've announced one of 20 endometriosis clinics and pelvic pain centres to be located at Kardinia Health in Belmont. Too many people suffer from excruciating pain and delayed diagnosis. These women go through so much, and it's about time that we shed light on this hidden and often debilitating condition. This clinic will give them the best treatment. In another reform, we will open one of 50 urgent-care clinics in Geelong. This will address people's non-life-threatening injuries and conditions. Instead of going to emergency, they can go to this clinic. It's going to mean less stress for health workers, it's going to mean people get treated quicker and it will mean that we can focus in our emergency departments on saving lives. These investments are important. Our government knows this. We want to strengthen Medicare and we want to give people the health services they deserve. After nine long years of Liberal neglect, it is time. It is time for these investments. Labor will continue to support people in their health needs. We are certainly committed to ensuring that the health and wellbeing of our citizens are paramount. New South Wales State Election 79 16:50 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes I rise today as constituents in Hughes prepare to go to the polls this weekend to decide the future of the state of New South Wales, my home state. The Perrottet government has set the benchmark across the Commonwealth on how to govern and on how deliver state government services. The Perrottet government has delivered on infrastructure. It's delivered on roads, on public transport, on women's safety, on education, on health services, on tax reform and on some very important social issues. The past four years have not been easy. New South Wales has faced catastrophic drought, bushfires, a pandemic and one-in-100-year floods, yet, despite all these odds, the Perrottet government has kept New South Wales moving forward and has maintained its AAA credit rating. Within my federal seat I have four outstanding state members. They have been part of the Perrottet government team that has obtained extraordinary amounts of money that was invested in health and transport infrastructure, for example. This includes $151 million for Sutherland Hospital, which has been used for new operating theatres, an emergency departments and a new MRI machine. Our member for Cronulla, Mark Speakman, has been an outstanding Attorney General for our state as well as a staunch advocate for Cronulla. He keeps thinking outside the square. Our member for Miranda, Eleni Petinos, has helped to obtain over half a million dollars for Harrie Dening field, home to the Sutherland Shire Football Association, the largest sporting association in the Southern Hemisphere. The member for Holsworthy, Melanie Gibbons, advocated for and obtained $790 million for upgrades to Liverpool Hospital. The member for Heathcote, Lee Evans, worked with Ms Gibbons and our roads minister, Natalie Ward, to deliver $188 million to upgrade Heathcote Road and then secured funding of $35 million to upgrade the dangerous Heathcote Road bridge. Domestic and family violence are ever-present issues throughout our country, and my electorate of Hughes is no exception. Late last year the Perrottet government passed one of its most critical reforms to date, the criminalisation of coercive control. Coercive control is a form of domestic abuse that involves patterns of serious cumulative behaviour that deny victims-survivors of their autonomy and independence. New South Wales is the first state in the Commonwealth and one of the very few jurisdictions in the world to implement these reforms. I must commend the work of New South Wales Attorney General Mark Speakman and, again Natalie Ward, who also holds the portfolio of the Minister for Women's Safety. The Perrottet government has also led the way on cashless gaming reform to try to improve the lives of those who are suffering with problem gambling. Education reforms have also been a hallmark of the Perrottet government. We've seen a return to a curriculum based on numeracy, literacy and writing skills, stripping out some of the nonsense that had driven parents mad with the school system. More teachers in New South Wales are now permanent. Just this year alone, there are 15,000 more permanent teachers than there were at the start of the year. To address the cost-of-living crisis, exacerbated largely by the nine consecutive rate rises we have seen under this federal Labor government, the Perrottet government has delivered a series of vouchers aimed to address this. These include $150 for the Premier's Back to School NSW Voucher, $500 for before and after school care, $285 for a low-income household energy rebate, $110 for a gas rebate and $180 for a family energy rebate. Seniors have not been forgotten, with a $200 seniors energy rebate. There's been preschool fee relief provided across our state, and, led by Natalie Ward, the cost of IVF has now been reduced. The New South Wales government has provided a $2,000 voucher to families looking to have a baby using IVF and has increased the number of fertility treatments in place in our public clinics. I was at the recent launch where Dominic Perrottet announced the New South Wales Kids Future Fund, helping a new generation to build the foundations of financial security so that they are ready for success in the New South Wales of tomorrow. I commend the Perrottet government for its work with its fresh ideas, its fresh policy and its ability to take New South Wales forward. (Time expired) Newcastle Electorate: Renewable Energy, Newcastle Electorate: Manufacturing 80 16:55 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle Newcastle and the Hunter region have powered Australia for generations and will continue to do so well into the future. As a proud Novocastrian I understand this. So does the Albanese Labor government. We know that carbon-intensive regions like Newcastle and the Hunter are ideally placed to take full advantage of the opportunities that come with renewable energy. That's why I am so excited that consultations for an offshore wind zone off the Newcastle coast are currently open. Community consultation sessions have already begun, with at least two face-to-face sessions in my electorate of Newcastle and an additional five that were held further north and south along the coastline. I'd like to thank those Novocastrians who took up this chance to hear directly from experts and to have their voices heard. I know there has been some concern about the potential impact of offshore wind on marine and bird life, and I want to reassure my constituents that around the world offshore wind farms do co-exist with wildlife—with whales, with migrant sea life and with birds. The proposed offshore wind zone, which is currently on display for public comment, follows initial analysis of marine topology, vessel traffic and sensitive environmental or defence areas. Part of the consultation process is to ensure that any infrastructure built within that proposed zone will have minimal impacts on marine users, the environment and wildlife. Following feedback from the community, the proposed area may need to be adjusted before a final offshore wind area is in fact declared, and there are a number of further steps to go through before any infrastructure can be built. Any company looking to establish an offshore renewable energy project is required to demonstrate how they will comply with the conditions of approval and environmental obligations under Australia's Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. This act provides a legal framework to protect and manage unique plants, animals, habitats and spaces, including marine areas. Potential developers will also need to submit a management plan to the Offshore Infrastructure Regulator. This process ensures that any developments manage risks in an environmentally acceptable way that also mitigates and minimises impacts on the environment and wildlife. I reassure the community that this is a genuine consultation process. I encourage all residents and all interested people to look at the map and to consider what it looks like, consider the implications for you and our community and then make a submission. They are open until 28 April. It was an honour to join Bekaert Australia recently to celebrate 100 years of continuous manufacturing excellence at their wire rope manufacturing facility in Mayfield. Originally known as Australia Wire Ropes Works, Bekaert was established in 1923 in Newcastle by what was BHP and four leading rope manufacturers in Great Britain. Bekaert holds a prominent place in Newcastle's—and, I suggest, the nation's—manufacturing history, employing and training thousands of men and women from the Newcastle and Hunter region over its long and distinguished career. It provided jobs during the Great Depression and diverted operations to support Australia's war efforts during World War II. Today Bekaert in Australia is a world leader in the manufacture, supply and technical support of wire and synthetic ropes. I was particularly pleased to see how much time and energy is going into being able to repurpose and renew those wire ropes, ensuring that the life cycle is extended fourfold compared to what it had been previously. Bekaert is just one of a number of leading manufacturing facilities now in Newcastle to have been operating for more than a century, which speaks volumes about the deep history of making things in our city—a tradition that stands to benefit enormously from Labor's $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund. The National Reconstruction Fund investments will help regional areas like Newcastle to diversify our economy and help create secure, well paid jobs. There is a very bright future for manufacturing in Newcastle under a Labor government. House adjourned at 17:00 The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Ms Payne ) took the chair at 09:30.

Thursday, 23 March 2023

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

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 81 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Infrastructure 81 09:30 Ms WATSON-BROWN 300127 Ryan Here in Australia we're one of the most urbanised populations in the world. Globally, 50 per cent of the world population lives in cities, while in Australia it's 85 per cent. Cities are the site and often the root cause of problems, but they can also offer the solutions to our crises—and right now we have a cocktail of major crises: housing, climate and the cost-of-living crisis. But with good planning and design we can address these crises and create sustainable cities to house and nurture all of us and the environment, and not massive developer profits. Rising to this challenge offers so much opportunity to design our cities around balancing equity, environment and energy. Equity means everyone gets a well-designed, affordable home to live in, world-class public services, beautiful green space and active public transport that's free and more convenient than driving. Environmental health means balance between the natural and built environments by retaining and regenerating natural ecosystems, which will be part of addressing the energy and emissions crisis. This in turn will help deal with the climate crisis. Cities produce 70 per cent of global emissions, an enormous proportion of which is from motorised private transport. So we need to rapidly decarbonise the city, not through fake offsets like in the Brisbane City Council but by transitioning to entirely renewable sources of energy. What does this mean for Brisbane? Brisbane could be the demonstration sustainable city. Brisbane will be hosting the Olympics in 2032, and this could leave a positive legacy. Sadly, at the moment, the government looks set to hand it all over to big developers for massive profits and leave the community worse off when the athletes and tourists head home. But the next 10 years could be, must be, the time when we create and demonstrate the model of an Australian sustainable city. In Ryan, I'm proud to be fighting for the start of this vision—for free, frequent and connected public transport for everyone; for walkable, safe neighbourhoods like the school community in The Gap; for preserving beautiful green space while delivering affordable housing at Kooya Road in Mitchelton; for a local school and services and a public and active transport bridge in Moggill-Bellbowrie; for a new community centre in Kenmore so real community can flourish; and for active transport infrastructure in St Lucia and across the west side. This new vision of the city isn't crazy; it's sensible, it's achievable, and it's urgently necessary. But we've got both major parties and their mates in the development industry in our way. So, to win it, it'll take all of us getting active and fighting for it. Vocational Education and Training 81 09:33 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle I'm glad to speak today about the vital role of vocational training and education and investments that are being made in skills and training in my electorate and across the country. Last week I was delighted to meet with staff and students at South Metropolitan TAFE's AeroSpace Training Centre in Jandakot in my electorate. The scope of education there includes training to be cabin crew, aviation mechanics and pilots. Students can take advantage of a range of certificate courses that create pathways into the aviation industry as it recovers after the pandemic. The centre includes a 1,500-square-metre hangar which offers impressive and extensive hands-on practical training. The campus hosts helicopters, light aircraft and a broad range of aviation components, in addition to a flight simulator. I was chuffed to meet with the next generation of cabin crew on board the centre's own Boeing 737. Alongside aviation, Fremantle has long been a home to high school maritime training. In the north-west of my electorate, South Metropolitan TAFE's Fremantle campus has been delivering internationally recognised maritime skills training for more than 20 years. Now, thanks to a $2 million investment from the McGowan Labor government, the campus boasts a state-of-the-art maritime simulator suite. The simulators allow shipmasters, officers and engineers to use the latest technology and training tools to suit the needs of existing and emerging maritime industries. The project, notably, is one of the many under the McGowan government's largest investment in TAFE in Western Australia's history. Under the former government there was a senseless and harmful decline in the number of apprentices and trainees across the country. Once again it is Labor governments, state and federal in Western Australia, that are doing the repair job, cleaning up the mess and helping prepare Australians for the future. There's no doubt that the aviation and maritime training capacity in my electorate has been expanded thanks to the Albanese government's commitment to deliver 180,000 fee-free TAFE places across the nation. Those opposite failed to secure a shared approach and commitment between the Commonwealth states and territories to drive skills and training forward, but, thankfully, under the leadership of my friend and colleague Brendan O'Connor, the Minister for Skills and Training, that has now changed. At the beginning of the year the Australian and WA governments signed a landmark skills agreement that means $112 million for WA skills and training, and provides fee-free TAFE and vocational education for more than 18,000 students. There's already been a surge of uptake, with more than 13,000 enrolments in semester 1. Impressively, 66 per cent of the cohort enjoying the benefits of the fee-free training are women. Qualifications in early childhood education, aged and disability care, nursing and technology have seen the strongest enrolments. At a time when we find ourselves with workforce shortages and demand in critical sectors, it is again Labor governments, state and federal, that are investing in a stronger, more highly skilled workforce and building a more resilient, prosperous economy for all. Campbell, Mr Andrew, Shire of Manjimup 82 09:36 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor I rise today to pay tribute to Andrew Campbell, the outgoing CEO of the Shire of Manjimup in the south-west region of my electorate of O'Connor. Andrew was appointed to Manjimup's top administrative position in 2014. This was a just few months after I was first elected to federal parliament. Over the ensuing decade, Andrew and I have worked together on many game-changing projects, including the Power Up Electricity Museum, which received $2.6 million under the former coalition government's Building Better Regions Fund. The museum and associated cafe now form a wonderful modern entry point to Manjimup's Heritage Park. Another significant project is the Manjimup Wellness and Respite Community Centre, which received a $1.6 million grant under the National Stronger Regions Fund. These are two of many projects that have driven Manjimup's recent urban renaissance. Visitors to central Manjimup will notice the Brockman Street lights, the new cafes and night spots, the town's revamped art deco buildings and the free wi-fi available through the town centre. All of these improvements have occurred on Mr Campbell's watch, but Manjimup as a shire is so much more. It's a shire of horticulture, truffles, premium wine production, tall timbers and quaint smaller towns. While Mr Campbell has been CEO I've been proud to be associated with the $200,000 grant to improve parking along Brockman Street in Pemberton. The former coalition government also helped improve accessibility at the town hall in Northcliffe and upgrade their heritage museum. Under the Mobile Black Spot Program, phone towers were built at 10 Manjimup locations, including base stations at Beedelup east, Mount Frankland west and Windy Harbour. At Windy Harbour, the daily pilgrimage to the top of Point d'Entrecasteaux, where a faint mobile signal once provided patchy reception, has now ceased. Locals and visitors can now access a strong signal from the comfort of their holiday huts in the heart of the settlement. In 2019, Andrew received the WALGA Local Government Distinguished Officer Award in recognition of his contribution as CEO and as a Manjimup shire officer for 26 years up to that point. Like me, Andrew has a passion for regional economic development. He helped drive Manjimup's transformation from a great timber-producing area to a supplier of fine food to local, national and international markets. Having helped navigate the shire's recovery from the devastating bushfires in 2015, Andrew now moves to Northampton, which was hit by Cyclone Seroja in 2021. As CEO of the Shire of Northampton, in the electorate of Durack, he will play a key role in the ongoing recovery from the destruction wreaked by Seroja. I'll miss working with Andrew. He has left a lasting legacy in Manjimup. Last week I visited Manjimup to personally thank Andrew and wish him all the best for the next chapter in his life. Child Care 82 09:39 Mr WATTS 193430 Gellibrand Child care will get cheaper for 1.2 million Australians in just 100 days time, thanks to the Albanese government. We know that Australians are under the pump from cost-of-living pressures, and we are taking action to help reduce the load. As a parent, I know how important the first five years of a child's life are in their development and in their long-term mental and physical wellbeing. The Albanese government was elected on a platform of delivering cheaper child care to fix the broken childcare system left by the former government. Under the former government's watch, childcare costs in Australia increased by 41 per cent over eight years. We are fixing the mess that they have left us. We've passed legislation to make child care cheaper for 1.2 million families starting from 1 July this year. We've invested $4.5 billion to give Australian children the best start to life and to allow parents, particularly women, the ability to return to work as soon as they are comfortable. We've lifted the maximum childcare subsidy rate to 90 per cent for families earning $80,000 or less. We've increased the subsidy rate for around 96 per cent of families earning under $530,000 with a child in child care. As a result, a family on the median combined income of $120,000 with one child in early childhood education will save around $1,780 a year. The Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, has also asked the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to investigate the factors impacting the supply and cost of childcare services. The ACCC will deliver their final report by the end of 2023. To see the impact of the Albanese government's action to make child care cheaper for 1.2 million Australians, I recently visited the Goodstart childcare facility in Point Cook. I toured the facilities and saw firsthand how proper investment in early childhood set up our children for a brighter future. But the staff at Goodstart also told me about the challenges that they're facing, including the trouble of attracting and retaining good quality childcare workers due to intense competition with other centres and the need to improve the quality of education and training for future childcare staff to deliver the best outcome for Australian kids. We know that over 10,000 families in my electorate currently receive a childcare subsidy. Our increase in the childcare subsidy will benefit the vast majority of these families, which will, in turn, improve the prospects and happiness of these kids and their parents. The children in Melbourne's west have the potential to achieve great things, from becoming doctors or successful business owners to political leaders like Julia Gillard or, hopefully, premiership winning Western Bulldogs players. With our investment in child care, the Albanese government is giving the children of Melbourne's west every opportunity to reach their full potential in life, whatever they choose to do. I would like to thank Goodstart's fantastic staff who showed me around their facilities, including Melissa, Jo-Ann, Manpreet and Makayla. I would also like to thank the Goodstart students, who presented me with a beautiful piece of artwork. Thanks, kids. Universities: Regional 83 09:42 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls I rise to talk about regional universities. Regional universities are so important. Without them, I wouldn't be here. I had the good fortune to pursue a degree in agricultural science. Fortunately, thanks to the commitment of the University of Melbourne, that agricultural science degree was available in a place called Dookie in my electorate and I was able to study a Bachelor of Applied Science in agriculture. Later in life, I wanted to come back and do some further study. Thanks to the commitment of La Trobe University—La Trobe University were running a regional MBA program—I was able to complete a regional MBA program in Shepparton, in my hometown, working full-time and going to night school from six to nine. Regional universities are important, so the governments of the day continue to commit to those universities that are prepared to commit to regional areas. One great example, also in my electorate, is the Department of Rural Health at the University of Melbourne. The Department of Rural Health is a great collaboration between La Trobe University and the University of Melbourne. Students can do a Bachelor of Biomedicine as an undergraduate degree in regional areas of Victoria, and then they can graduate to a postgraduate Doctor of Medicine, all in Shepparton, studying in Shepparton and going over the road to get some practical, hands-on experience in the hospital, Goulburn Valley Health. It's a great initiative that the former coalition government created and facilitated, and there are a multitude of young medical students now who making their home in the Goulburn Valley and are going to be fantastic regional GPs. They're going to stay because they've put down roots. There's data that shows that where people train is where they work. I met some of those students last week. We're so rapt to have them in our community. As everyone will be aware, GP shortages in the regions have been a continuing problem. This is a solid solution that is going to fix that, and we're going to see 40 new GPs per year graduating, as of the end of next year, coming out and flourishing in our regional areas. An opposition member: Can I have some? Mr BIRR 288713 Yes. We'll be sharing them everywhere! The point is that they will be regionally based. We have another great initiative on the books. That has work so well that we want to do with allied health. Latrobe University and Goulburn Valley Health have a great initiative to create a clinical health school. We made a commitment to it before the last election. I am hoping that the Labor government can see its way to support this fantastic initiative that will mean that there are more allied health and more nursing staff in our aged-care facilities and in our hospitals—regional kids going to regional universities, doing jobs that are desperately needed in the regions, and I commend the project to all in this place. Energy, Lilley Electorate: Community Events 83 09:45 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change confirms what my community on the north side of Brisbane already knows—there is a rapidly closing window for real climate action both at home and around the world. Global warming has increased at an unprecedented rate over the past decade. By the 2030s, every region in the world is expected to face increasing risks from climate change. We know that this will have a devastating impact on our communities, just as my community saw last year during the unprecedented February floods. After a decade of denial and delay, Australia finally has a federal government that is committed to taking serious action on climate change, not just talking about it. As part of our Powering Australia plan, the Albanese government is it investing in the decarbonisation of existing industries and the creation of new clean energy industries through our $1.9 billion Powering the Regions Fund. At least $600 million of this will assist safeguard facilities in reducing their emissions through energy efficiency upgrades, shifts to lower carbon processes or fuel switching to electrification, hydrogen and biofuels. The safeguard mechanism laws are the first chance to implement the transformative climate action that my community has been begging for, real action that actually gets us down to net-zero after a decade of delay and dysfunction. Northsiders are always quick to step forward when a friend or neighbour needs a helping hand. Volunteers are the backbone of our community and their selfless contributions make all of our lives better. While we know these volunteers do not do their work for the credit, their hard work does deserve to be recognised and appreciated. If you know a Lilley resident, business or community groups who deserves to be recognised for their volunteer work and community spirit, please nominate them for a Lilley volunteer award. Award recipients will be announced during National Volunteers Week in May. Northside families are getting excited for Welcoming the Babies, a proud annual tradition in our community more than 20 years strong. The pram pro-am running of the babies is back this year, hopefully, with a drier track than last year. My twins are sporting several more kilos than last year, so we are not the favourites. If you're taking up the challenge, make sure to bring your A game and strap your baby into their pram, as there will be prizes up for grabs for the winners. Free activities will also be a available for the kids at Welcoming the Babies including a petting zoo, a jumping castle, facepainting and arts and crafts. There will also be early education information stalls for mums and dads and, I hear, a visit from the Easter Bunny. See you there. Flynn Electorate 84 09:48 Mr BOYCE 299498 Flynn I rise to speak about Drynan Drive in Calliope and the Widgee 'say no to the powerlines' rally that was held recently. After years of advocacy, I welcome the start of the construction of the upgrade Drynan Drive and Dawson Highway intersection in Calliope. The intersection has daily high-traffic flows, including frequent truck movements, with the road often crossed by schoolchildren. Many locals I have spoken to have told me how dangerous this intersection is, especially during morning and afternoon drop-off times. Unfortunately, I have had to drag the Labor government kicking and screaming to commit to this project. Labor's own Minister for Transport and Main Roads, Mark Bailey, in 2021 clearly did not consider the project a priority, replying to one of my letters that this 'must compete against statewide priorities'. It took 97 days for the minister to reply to this letter. I consider the safety of the Calliope community paramount and I am glad the upgrade of Drynan Drive is finally underway. On March 17, I attended the community rally at Widgee near Gympie, where over 200 people are vehemently against high-voltage transmission lines crossing their land. They came out to protest and seek help from their government representatives. This is exactly what I spoke about in my maiden speech. The impact of renewable energy projects, including transmission lines, will be enormous, and this is just the beginning. The virtue-signalling inner-city population do not have a clue of what massive renewable projects are meaning for our local communities. If the Labor Party are to achieve their 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2030, their own estimates require 22,000 solar panels to be installed every day between now and 2030. This will equate to some 40 million solar panels. There will be 40 wind turbines required to be built every month between now and 2030—approximately 4,000 in total. All this goes along with 28,000 kilometres of high-voltage transmission lines to connect these projects to the grid, and with metropolitan Australia having an understanding of the impact that this will have on rural Australia. Next month Liddell power station will close, and in 2025 it is proposed that Eraring power station close, and I predict that the lights will go out in metropolitan Australia. Only then, when it's too late, will the inner-city zealots understand the energy fiasco that has been created by this sensible, unachievable rush to renewable energy. I say: do not close any power generation resources until equal generation capacity has been built. To do so will have consequences for business, industry and the householder that will not easily be fixed. I feel like I'm the lookout on the Titanic, screaming, 'Iceberg! Iceberg!' and nobody's listening. So I say once again that I believe we as Australians are on the road to an energy-generating crisis. International Relations: Australia and India 84 09:51 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell I rise to congratulate and commend the Prime Minister on his recent visit to India and, with this, pay tribute to the Indian community in my electorate. My community welcomes the further strengthening of the bilateral relationship between Australia and India that was announced at the Annual Leaders' Summit in New Delhi between the two prime ministers. We have an active and vibrant Indian diaspora here in Australia, contributing to all walks of life in our country. Their contribution on many social, economic and cultural fronts has made a significant impact to communities right across Australia, including in my own electorate. The engagement of our Indian community in my electorate and their participation within groups and civil society have been of great benefit to our local constituency, and we are all the better for it. On the diplomatic front, our engagement with India and people-to-people links have been very important contemporary pillars for Australia's ability to build its research capacity. It has also been very important to our ability to develop many of the key sectors that have supported the growth of our economy. Education has been particularly important to the Australian Indian community, and I'm pleased that education was a key focus of the Annual Leaders' Summit. The new agreement, which supports mutual recognition of education qualifications, is very much welcomed. Coupled with the progress being made on a new migration and mobility partnership arrangement, this will have a very positive impact on our people-to-people links, which should always be at the forefront of diplomatic engagement with our region and with the global community. The agreement is very important to our onshore international education sector and will encourage the mobility of students, graduates and professionals. I spoke earlier of the obstructions faced by and constraints on newly arrived migrants, and having the migration and mobility partnership arrangement placed at the top of the Prime Minister's agenda as part of his visit reflects how acutely aware this government is of the challenges and opportunities before us. Ours is a government that understands that engagement with our region and the world is not a spectator sport and that this engagement is underpinned by an appreciation that our modern Australia shares characteristics and values of a similar nature to those present in our neighbourhood and our source countries of migration. The visit was a mark of the enduring friendship between our two countries and was a transformational step of benefit to both Australia and India, with a focus on new jobs and mutual opportunities. I want to congratulate the Prime Minister on the success of his visit. I share in my community's optimism for the future of our enduring bilateral relationships, and I do so in particular because, in my constituency, almost one-third of people living in Calwell are from the subcontinent, particularly from India, but also from neighbouring Pakistan and Bangladesh. They are the new Australians of the future. COVID-19: Response 85 09:54 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash The first thing I'd like to do is associate myself with the words of the member for Calwell in the speech she has just given and associate this side of parliament with them too. I seek leave, if there is no dissent, to table a document today, an article from the Australian. To explain what it is, it says: 'Australia recorded relatively more "excess deaths" during the COVID-19 pandemic than Sweden.' It is by Adam Creighton in a Washington post. Leave granted. Mr BROADBENT MT4 I couldn't be more excited than I am today to read this. Here are some snippets from the article about new OECD analysis: New OECD analysis comparing excess deaths in 2020 and 2021—the two worst years of the pandemic—for 36 developed nations reveals Australia had the fifth lowest increase in excess deaths, but came in behind Sweden, which attracted global scorn for resisting closing businesses, schools and ordering citizens to stay at home. Including excess deaths—defined as those over and above what was expected—for 2022 as well puts Australia even further behind Sweden with an 8.2 per cent increase over the three-year period compared with Sweden's 3.1 per cent. …   …   … The OECD report, Ready for the Next Crisis? Investing in Health Care Resilience, found half of all Covid-19 deaths occurred among people aged 80 across 22 OECD countries with comparable data, and one third occurred in nursing homes. Mexico and Colombia, which did impose lockdowns, endured the greatest increases in excess deaths of about 50 per cent. Japan and Sweden, the only two OECD nations to resist them, prompting international condemnation at the time, had among the lowest increases, ranking 4th and 8th, respectively. Two US public health experts who in 2020 recommended the Swedish approach—Stanford University's Jay Bhattacharya and Harvard's Martin Kulldorff—said they felt vindicated but despaired at the lack of appreciation of the findings and feared the same policies would be followed again. "The thing to emphasise is that Sweden has had one of the lowest excess mortalities in all Europe during the pandemic no matter how you cut the data," Professor Bhattacharya said. "If lockdowns were necessary to prevent death it should have had one of the worst. Sweden served as a control group for the world in ethical pandemic management and it was a rousing success." He said the success Australia had in having "little Covid on the island for a full year came at tremendously high cost: 270 days of lockdown in Melbourne, essential imprisonment of the population". The underlying health of a country's population (including rates of obesity), vaccination levels against Covid-19, and the capacity and quality of the available health care system best explained the widely different rates … And our economy decreased by 39 per cent and their economy increased by— (Time expired.) General Practice 86 09:57 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga Many people in my community are rightly concerned about access to health care, particularly when it comes to being able to see a GP at the moment. I want to thank all the locals in my community who have taken the time to contact me and share their concern and their experiences about how difficult it is to see a GP and, in particular, to access a bulk-billing service. I want to thank the hardworking GPs who have also come to see me to explain how they feel stretched and burnt out and not sure how long they can continue for. I know that having timely access to health care has real impacts on people 's health and life. A deferred trip to a GP because of unavailability or cost can mean serious consequences down the track. And of course it's not just individuals who suffer because of this. We all suffer when our community is unhealthy, health problems are left to crisis point and our busy hospitals are stretched even further. We didn't get to this point by accident. There were nine long years of cuts to and neglect of Medicare under the previous Liberal-National governments, including, most significantly, a six-year freeze on the Medicare rebate. The result of this is that it is harder than ever to see a doctor, particularly a GP. It has never been more expensive to see a doctor. For the first time in the 40-year history of Medicare, the average gap fee for a standard GP consult is now more than the Medicare rebate itself. This cannot go on. My community has sent me here with a very clear message, which I'm taking to the Minister for Health and Aged Care and which I'm raising here, that we must invest in our health care. We must make it easier to get access to GPs and good health care in our communities. I know that, unlike previous Liberal-National governments, these calls are not falling on deaf ears. Labor is the party of Medicare. We created Medicare and we will always protect it. Our government has no higher priority than strengthening Medicare and rebuilding general practice to ensure that Australians get the care they need, when and where they need it. After nine long years of cuts to and neglect of Medicare, particularly that six-year Medicare rebate freeze, we know that this is not going to be a quick solution. We know it's not going to be easy, but we are committed to making it work. We are committed to fixing Medicare. I want to reassure residents in my community: whether you're in Eltham, Greensborough, Heidelberg—right through my electorate—we know that you want to be able to see a GP when and where you need it. You want it to be affordable. You don't want to be left in a position where you have to go to an emergency room. The investments our government are making, the $750 million to deliver the highest priority investments in primary care and the investments we will make in the budget in May, are important. They are all part of our efforts to strengthen and fix Medicare after it being neglected for too long under the Liberals and Nationals. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 144732 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BUSINESS 86 BUSINESS Rearrangement 86 10:00 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite I move: That business intervening before order of the day No. 1, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day. Question agreed to. COMMITTEES 86 COMMITTEES Parliamentary Standards Joint Select Committee 86 Report 86 10:01 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah I rise to speak on this important work. I commend the report and the work of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards. I'd like to thank, in particular, the secretariat and the members of the Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Standards, and my independent colleague Kylie Tink, the member for North Sydney, who has been working on it. This is really important. For context: the Set the standard review done by Sex Discrimination Commissioner Kate Jenkins shocked the nation. I think it's fair to say it shocked most of us in here—I hope—but it also shocked the nation in terms of the wide scale and the level of discrimination, abuse, disrespect, harassment and even allegations of assault and sexual assault in the parliamentary workplace. I think it was a pretty low bar for the Commonwealth workplace. Now the endeavour is to make sure that that can never be the case again and that we set much better standards, as Commissioner Jenkins aptly named her report. This place is setting the laws and the rules for the rest of the country that so many other workplaces must comply with. This place should be the gold standard that other workplaces aspire to. What was made so clear in that report is that it's very far from that. This place has a long way to go. I think parliamentarians need to take this on board and take responsibility for the workplace that we are creating and a part of. We need to set a standard of behaviour that can be the gold standard around the country. One of the recommendations of the Set the standard report by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner was the development of a code of conduct for parliamentarians. The committee that issued this report was formed to develop that code of conduct and the standards for parliamentarians. Since coming into this place in 2019 I have been advocating for a code of conduct. I must say, it was one of the things I was most shocked about in coming into this place, coming from the bar, where of course there is a code of conduct and there is practice. One of the main exams you pass to become a barrister is around ethics. So it was quite surprising to know that there is no code of conduct in this place. I think it's pretty much the only workplace remaining without such a standard. I welcome the motion for the establishment of a code of conduct for parliamentarians today. It's important progress and something I very strongly support. It is an important benchmark we can all measure ourselves to and hold ourselves to. I greatly appreciate the work of all involved in bringing it to this point. Kate Jenkins, as Australia's Sex Discrimination Commissioner, welcomed the development of the codes. When they were endorsed by the parliament, she said: This is an historic moment. Federal Parliament has never had codes of conduct. They are an important tool to help ensure parliament is a safe, respectful workplace. Let's talk about the recommendations. I was pleased to see the commitment of all parties to the implementation of the behaviour standards for Commonwealth parliamentary workplaces and the behaviour code for parliamentarians. That was recommendation 2. I look forward to the creation of the independent parliamentary standards commission, as recommended in both this report and the Set the Standard report, to support the full implementation of the codes. That is recommendation five. I also welcome the adoption of the interim codes of conduct until that body is established. That is recommendation 3. I trust that upon the creation of the standards commission we will seek to implement all recommendations, in particular six and seven, to establish a clear understanding of the roles of parliamentarians with respect to the codes and impose sanctions for not complying. Unfortunately, we know that there needs to be deterrence and so for codes of conduct to really bite there needs to be consequences for when they are ignored. So I support the establishment of a body to oversee and conduct reviews into the implantation and enforcement of the standards, as per recommendation 10. It's important that protections against vexatious claims, frivolous and unreasonable complaints under the codes are also protected against and policies are established to inform people of these policies, as per recommendation 14. I also strongly support recommendation 16, which recommends a proactive approach to training and education when implementing the codes. It is really important that not only staff but parliamentarians be aware and properly understand the expectations that arise from the code. Recommendation 9 of the report—key to the success of the transformation of this place—is that staff are aware of the changes that are being made and are involved in the process of driving change. The staff consultative group is an important element. As a member of the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce, I am pleased with the progress towards the establishment of a staff consultative group. It will assist in the amplification of the message, it will drive increased participation in decision-making and it will increase buy-in to the solutions developed. I do say to staff across this place and in everyone's electoral offices that it is important to engage with this process. Unless we get their feedback, unless we hear from you the solutions can't be developed and put in place. It is really important that staff have buy-in, that they feel empowered, that they feel heard, so that they can speak up when the circumstances and situations require it. Much of the responsibility for the implementation of this report and its recommendations has been given to the Parliamentary Leadership Taskforce, which I'm on, and we're certainly dedicated to see that happen. I welcome the appointment of Dr Vivienne Thom as the new chair of the taskforce and I look forward to working with her throughout this term. I thank her and the secretariat for their hard work. One element that we are currently engaging with is working towards the establishment of an alcohol policy to address the issues that consumption creates for behaviour in this place, and I really hope to see that implemented very shortly. I think it will be a step forward to ensuring that the parliamentary and the Commonwealth workplace is a respectful workplace. Debate adjourned. ADJOURNMENT 87 ADJOURNMENT Indi Electorate: Community Services 88 10:09 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi As I rise to speak today, back home in my electorate of Indi at Waminda Community House in Benalla the weekly food relief session is beginning. Each week, families drop into Waminda to pick up fresh fruit and vegetables and other food for their households, a service that helps those struggling to make ends meet. We hear a lot about the rising cost of living in this place, but places like Waminda are where people are really feeling it. Last week when I visited Waminda, the manager there, Leanne Bullard, told me that demand for the food relief service is slowly but surely rising. At Waminda people take what they need for food relief, and Leanne says both the number of people and the amount of food being collected is increasing as conditions get more and more difficult. I also recently visited Albury Wodonga Regional FoodShare, where the story is very similar. The number of people seeking out their services is going up, including people from more backgrounds, people who are really struggling. I met with volunteer coordinator Sue Thornton and chair Simon Welsh, and they told me they were staggered by the change in people seeking help from their service. It's people who are working, it's single mums with kids and mortgages, and there just isn't enough money to pay for food, the roof over their heads and the bills they have to cope with. There are community houses and food shares across my electorate who are telling the same story. More people are needing help, and time and time again they are stepping up to meet that demand. People are heading off to work, contributing to our communities, but there is no guarantee there will be enough for them. Albury Wodonga Regional FoodShare says that across their region there are 22,230 people living in poverty, and that includes 4,942 children. This is defined by those with a household income of less than $368 per week. It's hard to fathom, but this is the reality. In their catchment, on any given day at least 2,223 people require food assistance. The government is indebted to these neighbourhood houses. Our communities are indebted to these neighbourhood houses and food shares because they are filling the gap when policy fails. The cost of living goes up and up, and yet the rate of JobSeeker and other welfare payments barely shifts. It is charities, neighbourhood houses and others that are stepping into the breach. This week we saw the launch of the Parliamentary Friends of Ending Poverty, and the message from Reverend Tim Costello and economist Chris Richardson was clear: an increase in welfare payments and the May budget is long overdue. Mr Richardson said that the single unemployment benefit as a percentage of full-time wage earnings has dropped from 24 per cent in 1990 to 18.5 per cent today. Amongst OECD countries, Australia is only second lowest, after Greece, in unemployment benefits as a percentage of full-time earnings. A new study released this week from the University of New South Wales and the Australian Council of Social Service found 60 per cent of people on the JobSeeker Payment, 72 per cent of people on the parenting payment and 34 per cent of people on youth allowance lived in poverty. We must do better to support the most vulnerable in our society. Neighbourhood houses, charities and food shares play an important role, but we can't keep expecting more and more of them to do this if the government won't also step up. I want to say thank you to every neighbourhood house, food share, charity and organisation in my electorate of Indi that is ensuring people in our committees have fresh fruit and vegetables, that they don't go hungry, that they have sanitary items, that they have dignity. You are a vital but often unseen part of our society. Soon we will see the first report from the new Economic Inclusion Advisory Panel on the adequacy of income support payments. The panel was set up following a sensible amendment from Independent Senator David Pocock last year, and I thank him for that very important work. I think we know what the panel will say about the state and the rate of JobSeeker and other payments, and I certainly hope that this government will finally listen. Hasluck Electorate 88 10:14 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck Flying from Perth to Canberra on Sunday last week, I was fortunate to share a flight with the great singer-songwriter Paul Kelly. He was on his way home from performing in Perth at the Red Hot Summer Tour. Along with other Aussie icons like Bernard Fanning, Missy Higgins and Mark Seymour, he got to perform to a terrific crowd at the Sandalford winery, which happens to be in my electorate of Hasluck. It is an extraordinarily beautiful vineyard, and I had the good fortune to have lunch last week with Peter Prendiville, the family owner of the winery, and CEO Grant Brinklow. Firstly, I congratulate them for being a recipient of the Wine Tourism and Cellar Door Grant program. It's a testament to the investment that they have put in, which is being backed in and matched by federal funding. It was also an opportunity to understand their business aspirations for the area and their ideas on how we can fully capitalise on the value that comes from the Swan Valley. Whilst I appreciate that Sandalford is one of the larger vineyards in the valley, I have also taken time over these past ten months to meet with a number of different businesses, including the myriad of businesses that support the Swan Chamber of Commerce, whose functions I enjoy regularly. I met with Andrea Romeo of Mondo Nougat, who has been a very strong advocate for making sure that the NBN and mobile phone coverage supports the business needs of the area. Unlike some other parts, particularly across metropolitan Perth and the peri-urban area, this is not a built-up, densely populated area, so it has been neglected for the last 10 years. We want to make sure that they have the support that they need to operate well because, whilst there are few businesses and few residents, the number of people that visit the region—half a million people a year—means they need access to the same services as everyone else. That is particularly so when doing transactions on EFTPOS and when running regular business but also when taking selfies to share to Instagram and TikTok. That's the way businesses are promoted. So we need to make sure that both the businesses and those visiting are able to have the full experience and then share it beyond to grow. Understanding the value of the Swan Valley as well as the Perth Hills—the two of which have a strong alignment in terms of culture and history and the issues and challenges that we really want to work through—really does require coordinated development. The reality is that there are very few places in the world where just 15 to 20 kilometres from the city you can be amongst this beautiful area to enjoy and recreate. We really want to begin understanding how we can corral the issues together and have a constructive way forward. Some of these issues are big. We're making significant investments in road and transport infrastructure. The intent is to make the roads more efficient, so people spend less time driving. That is fantastic, but this particular area is essentially a tourist trail. So we need to be sensitive to how we manage and balance the needs of people trying to navigate from east to west and north to south while also being mindful that this is a very precious tourist precinct and we want to keep that experience intact. I've already alluded to the communications, but, both in the valley and up in the hills, the reliability is very ad hoc. In the hills, it's largely a terrain issue; it's very difficult for the regular towers to get through. So we are increasingly using satellites to address that problem. We are using science and technology to make advances there. Thankfully, the government has got a significant commitment to fix the NBN, so I'll be very pleased over the course of this term to see those issues resolved once and for all. Public transport is also essential. My own parents, who I'm very pleased are actually here in the gallery with me today, lived out in Ellenbrook around 2006. My parents are very frequent users of public transport; it is their preferred means of travelling whenever possible. Sadly, the funding for the METRONET rail to get out to Ellenbrook was never backed in, to support the state at that time, so the project was continually delayed. Thankfully, it's back on track. The station is being built now, so we do expect the opportunity for people to be able to travel— (Time expired) Exmouth: Housing 89 10:19 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack I rise today to bring attention to the severe housing shortage in the town of Exmouth, located in the electorate of Durack. Exmouth, a naturally beautiful township with a rich history, is surrounded by the dramatic gorges of Cape Range National Park and by Australia's largest fringing reef, the World Heritage listed Ningaloo Reef. According to recent data from the Regional Australia Institute, Exmouth is one of Australia's fastest growing towns, and I can see why. Who wouldn't want to live in this beautiful place? This is a vibrant community—a community that relies heavily on the tourism trade. The whale shark swimming season started earlier this month. Opportunities to swim with these magnificent creatures are very rare, with the Ningaloo region being, I believe, the only place in Australia where, indeed, you can do this. Incidentally, a little-known fact about these gentle giants of the sea is that they are not actually whales but the largest fish in the ocean. Whale sharks can grow to an incredible 12 metres in length and can weigh up to 21.5 tonnes. Exmouth has long been a defence town. It was established in 1964 to provide support to the Naval Communication Station Harold E Holt and to house dependent families of US Navy personnel. Today, Exmouth has a population of around 2,000, which can swell to over 6,000 during the height of the tourism season. The colours and sea life in and around Ningaloo Reef draw visitors from all over the world. To add to the drawcard of Exmouth's famous natural attractions, in just under a month's time visitors to Exmouth will have front-row seats to one of nature's most phenomenal occurrences, a total solar eclipse. This is an extraordinary and rare astronomical event that represents a unique opportunity for Western Australia and, indeed, Australia. On 20 April 2023 at 11:27 am the shadow of the moon will graze the tip of Western Australia in a 40-kilometre-wide track as it travels over the Ningaloo region near Exmouth, making it the most accessible land based place on earth to view this spectacle. Visitors and astronomy lovers alike will be able to experience day turn to night. The process of the moon moving across the face of the sun takes three hours, but the brief moments of totality when the sun is completely obscured by the moon will last only 62 seconds. This is a spectacle that will not occur again in this area in our lifetime, so I encourage people to visit Exmouth during this time and experience this for yourselves. You will not be disappointed. The Exmouth community, understandably, are very proud of where they live, and they have a very deep passion for their town. Like many other regional towns, the Exmouth community is currently facing a severe housing shortage. This is coupled with intensive migration growth. According to Regional Australia Institute data, Exmouth is the only Western Australian local government area north of Perth on the list of Australia's four areas with the largest increase in migration. But the housing shortage is hindering the town's development and causing significant frustration amongst locals. Local businesses are unable to secure staff due to these shortages. But it is just as important for our essential workers. We're seeing nurses and teachers having to stay in limited hotel accommodation. Families and would-be residents alike are struggling to find any kind of accommodation. Last week, I have the great pleasure of travelling to Exmouth. I met with the local shire, the chamber of commerce, many local businesses, many local residents and, of course, those wonderful volunteer groups. I don't mind saying that these passionate Exmouth locals are incredibly frustrated by the housing issues in their town. The one concern that they all had in common was the lack of land being released. I believe the land available for release is being held up by previously expired native title processes or by a failure to implement the necessary flood mitigation measures. Put simply, we need our state government to lift its game, so I'm calling on Minister John Carey, the housing minister in the WA state parliament, to make it a priority. Please, liaise with the local shire, hasten the land title lease processes to provide and make available more land. More could and should be done to help this community to grow. That's what it wants. Exmouth deserves so much better from the McGowan government. Climate Change, Parliamentary Standards 90 10:24 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm Today is a cold, fairly miserable, drizzly day in Canberra. It is the morning after the night before. What a disgraceful night it was last night in the main chamber, when we were in debate for the Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill. I reflected, as a first-term MP in the first ten months of my first term, on what it means to represent a community and the things that matter to them. In my community of Chisholm the environment really matters, and taking action on climate change really matters. I thought that everyone in this place stood for parliament so that they could do what was required in the best interests of this nation. Last night we saw a pretty childish display from those opposite. I reflect very seriously on the fact that the IPCC released a report yesterday morning. I, like so many in my community and, I expect, in other communities across this country, was horrified to realise that time is running out to take meaningful action on climate. We put forward legislation in the House of Representatives that those opposite not only refused to support, but spent last night disrupting, delaying and making a mockery of. When history looks back to this moment in time, it will see those who treated action on climate as a joke and those who seriously tried to make a difference for the survival of this planet. Every time I have a mobile office, climate change is raised as one of the most important issues in my community. I reflect back to the election campaign when my opponent, from the former government, refused to attend a climate change forum. For too long this issue has not been treated seriously by those opposite, and when given the opportunity to come together as a parliament, as parliaments across the world do, those opposite refused. It's actually a really normal thing to come together to take action on climate change in other places, but unfortunately not here. That is a real shame for our country, and it is a real stain on the history of their party. It was a ridiculous, petty, petulant, entitled performance that we were treated to last night, and families across the country will have seen it. Perhaps I could plead to the better natures of those opposite to do better in the future, but if that's not enough—if appealing to their conscience is not enough—perhaps they will look to their electoral self-interest. Perhaps they will realise that the community has handed a mandate to our government to take action on the climate. In my very first speech in this place I spoke of Pat and John, a lovely couple I met just near the Wattle Park shops in my electorate. They were so concerned about climate and integrity and the future that their grandchildren would inherit. Every time I go to an early childhood education place, I speak to children about the need to look after the environment; in fact, this is the issue they raise with me. The local ACF group in Chisholm; Baby Boomers for Climate Change Action in my electorate; Tomorrow Movement; Lighter Footprints; and school students—environmental captains in their schools—raise the importance of climate change action with me all the time. I know I'm not the only MP who gets asked these questions. I'm sure those opposite do too, and I really do wonder how they answer such questions. Maya Angelou has a really fantastic quote that I think of often when I think of those opposite: 'When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.' I hope the people of Australia see what they're shown by those opposite: not just their failure to take action climate change but their turning what was an important moment for this nation and for energy policy into a joke by trying to shut down the debate in parliament, by trying to find the tactics to make sure we can't take this issue seriously as a country. It was a disgrace, and they should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. Hinkler Electorate 91 10:29 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler For the information of the member who just spoke, it is the Labor Party in opposition that holds the record for the most number of times they have called divisions, quorums and made the bells ring and misplace since Federation, so I think it is a bit precious to make those types of comments. I was on the road last week doing what's collectively known as 'Pitt stops' all over the Hinkler electorate—in Urangan, Pialba and Burrum, Buxton, Woodgate, Childers, lots of places in Bundaberg and all over the show. People were very much concerned about power prices and about the cost of living—the No. 1 issue for all of them. I represent a lot of people who do not have a lot of money at their disposal. Every single time costs go up it makes their lives far more difficult than they need to be. For them, that was the No. 1 issue. At No. 2 was the voice, and they were almost unanimously opposed, apart from one individual who had some sympathy for one element out of the three but would oppose it anyway if the three were put forward in the current format. In no surprise to me, they are tired of getting 20, 30, 10, welcome to countrys at every event they go to. They have no issue with someone making that acknowledgement but to have it from every speaker in every format and in every videoconference was something that quite simply they did not think was necessary. They support a nuclear industry. What we know is that federal Labor, with a commitment through AUKUS—a security arrangement which clearly we originally negotiated and secured—will have a nuclear industry in Australia. That's the bottom line. It's already here. You'll have the people, you will have the facilities, you will have to deal with waste and you will have to lift the moratorium; that's a statement of fact. I do these 'Pitt stops' twice a year where I can and sometimes no-one shows up. Sometimes I get two or three, 10, 15, 20, 30, but at Burrum Heads, which is in the middle of my electorate, a beautiful coastal village at the river heads of the Barwon River, I got 63 people show up for a roadside. For that to happen, there has to be a serious issue for all of them. I thank them all for turning out. It's not a federal issue. It's not one for which I could take much action other than raise here—that is, a flying fox colony at Burrum Heads. It's their belief that the colony moved from Fraser Island when it was severely burnt out in a fire last year or the year before, if I recall correctly, which, in my view, could have been put out but they were prevented from using saltwater to put out the fire. They had to fly and take from the freshwater supply inland, which slowed the delivery by helicopters. Regardless of all that, the community is incredibly concerned about this very large flying fox colony that is in a lagoon around their small township. To give you an idea of some of the impact, one of the residents raised with me the fact that all her now deceased husband wanted to do was sit on his back deck of his home in his last days and hours and he simply couldn't because the flying fox population. For those of you who have ever dealt up with them, they smell awful, they are incredibly noisy and it is just not manageable. For this issue to have not been dealt with by local and state governments, in my view, is an absolute disgrace. They have had ample time. There are well-known methods to move on flying fox colonies. Since when did the amenity of a flying fox colony become more important than that of the human population in a town centre? We deal with these issues in the Northern Territory, in North Queensland, in fact all over the place. Australia is a really big country. There are lots of places for flying fox colonies to be based where they don't have this interaction. The idea that you can't move them on, that there is not a process, is wrong. I am advised that there are steps that can be taken. I have written to council. I have written to the state member. They both responded; although one responded by saying, 'We'll get back to you in 28 days.' The state MP did call my office and said they had raised the matter with the department of environment. I say to the state Labor member: that is great but how about they do something? This is a fundamental problem for the people who live there. It smells bad. Their houses get covered in faeces. It's incredibly noisy. It directly impacts their amenity and the way that they live their life in what is a beautiful seaside village. So I say again to Fraser Coast council and to the Queensland Labor government: stop messing about. Pick up the phone, call one another and sort this out. For me to get 60 people at a roadside says this is a massive issue locally that needs to be fixed. Eden-Monaro Electorate: Aged Care, Eden-Monaro Electorate: Arts, Eden-Monaro Electorate: Merimbula Skate Park 91 10:34 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I welcome the opportunity today to provide an update on the Bombala community's Currawarna assisted living proposal. Last year we saw the Currawarna aged-care centre close its doors after 43 years of operation. The centre was built by the community. It was a much loved facility in that community and was proudly supported by the Bombala and Monaro communities. It was a victim of staff shortages and the changing structure of aged care. I was upset and frustrated last year, as were so many people in that community, when the Morrison government stood by and did nothing when the facility closed. But the strength of this regional community has meant that they started the #standwithcurrawarna Facebook page. They formed a committee, and they've now got a proposal, the Currawarna assisted living proposal, which utilises the existing facility to provide affordable, supported housing for those who are unable to continue to live at home independently. The facility would have access to the care-at-home packages from the My Aged Care program, as well as to NDIS packages, to provide services on the premises, while the cost of residential living will be paid for by the residents without the need for residential aged-care deposits. The committee envisage that this will also support in the delivery of home-care and NDIS packages to the wider community by centralising the demand in a central location. I was extremely pleased that Steve Whan, the Labor candidate for Monaro in the upcoming state election committed a Minns Labor government to fully fund this community driven project, a commitment that will build on the incredible efforts of the community, who have already fundraised over $200,000 to get this up and running. The community know that it will take about $1 million of working capital to get this facility open, and they have got there with the commitment from Steve Whan. This project needs to go ahead. It doesn't need more political gameplaying. We know that this fits directly into the state government's responsibilities in assisted living. Without the need for continued federal funding, this commitment gets this centre open. I look forward to Saturday coming along and those residents of Bombala and the Monaro district being able to vote for a proposal to get this back open for them. I rise today also to discuss the Australian government's landmark national cultural policy Revive: A place for every story, a story for every place, which was released in January this year. It's a five-year plan to renew and revive Australia's arts, entertainment and culture sector. It delivers the momentum that Australia's creative workers, organisations and audiences need to continue to thrive and grow so that our arts culture and heritage are repositioned as central to Australia's future. The mighty Eden-Monaro is full of stories of renewal and revival, and I'd like to highlight just a few of those today. Three years on from the Black Summer bushfire, artists Nat Ord and Vanessa Keenan have collaborated to produce Mid Stories, a multi-artform exhibition that explores the impact of the fires on our landscape and our community. It uses photography, video, solargraphy, augmented reality and installation to show the destruction and the regeneration of the Batlow area. Having lived through the Black Summer fires, Vanessa and Nat used their experience to inspire their art. The Regeneration Roadtrip, which was developed by Navigate Arts was an arts road trip from Canberra to the far South Coast. It showcased the incredible arts across many towns and communities of Eden Monaro. Hosted in September and October last year, the self-guided road trip included stopovers at concerts, exhibitions, installations and workshops. Yuin artist Warren Foster Sr recreated and installed a scar tree for the Regeneration Roadtrip project. He held talks to explain the significance of scar trees in First Nations cultures. Locals recognise the immense value of the sector to our economy, to our community and to our culture. Revive will empower talented artists and arts organisations like Nat, Vanessa and Warren and organisations like Navigate Arts to thrive and to grow, unlocking new opportunities, reaching new audiences and telling stories in a compelling way. On that note I give a quick shout-out to local Braidwood artist John R Walker, who has just had his artwork Eagle Spirit,Vathiwarta acquired for the collection of the National Gallery of Australia. How lucky is it that all of us get to see this local art in our national collection, something everyone in the mighty Eden-Monaro can be proud of. Finally, I'll give a quick shout-out to the Sapphire Coast Skate Park Association. This organisation has been working for years, trying to get a renewed skate park in the township of Merimbula. We're now a step closer. The council has confirmed that it will back Ford Park as the location. I give a shout-out to Peter O'Keefe, in particular, who has been driving this project for a number of years. Our election commitment of $500,000 will see stage 1 of that project delivered in Merimbula. Question agreed to. F ederation Chamber adjourned at 10:40