2023-05-09 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Tuesday, 9 May 2023

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Milton Dick ) took the chair at 12:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

MOTIONS 1 MOTIONS Coronation of His Majesty King Charles III 1 12:01 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I move: That an Address of Congratulation be presented to His Majesty The King, as follows: YOUR MAJESTY We, the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives, express to Your Majesty our warm congratulations at this time of your Coronation. We express our respect and regard for the dedication you have displayed in your commitment to public service and to the people of Australia. On behalf of the parliament and the people of Australia, I send our sincere congratulations to His Majesty King Charles III and to Her Majesty Queen Camilla on their coronations. Along with other Commonwealth realms, Australia welcomes the new King and Queen and the beginning of a new era. The coronation of a new monarch has occurred only four times since Australia became a nation. At Federation on 1 January 1901, Queen Victoria was coming to the end of her long and remarkable reign. Her sons and grandsons followed her through the first tumultuous half of the 20th century; then her great-great-granddaughter, crowned 70 years ago, went on to eclipse her record to become Britain's longest-serving monarch. Until her passing last year, Queen Elizabeth II was the only reigning monarch most Australians had ever known, and the only one to visit our shores. Australians' personal respect and affection and admiration for her remarkable service will never fade. As King Charles takes up the duties his mother so faithfully fulfilled, he makes the same promise of lifelong service and the same commitment to the institutions of democracy that she vowed to uphold. The new King and Queen clearly intend to serve with energy, integrity and empathy. In his first speech as King, His Majesty paid tribute to the fine example his mother had set and promised to serve with loyalty, respect and love for people, irrespective of their backgrounds or beliefs. He spoke of the way that society had changed over his lifetime, transforming into one of many cultures and many faiths, even as the bedrock values of freedom and responsibility remain constant. The coronation itself is, in a profound sense, a part of this conversation between tradition and change, continuity and renewal. Even as he performs a role that has endured for almost a thousand years, the King makes his pledge in a modern world with a promise to the future. For more than 50 years, His Majesty King Charles has been a passionate champion of the environment, espousing the belief that we must think seven generations ahead to have any chance of leaving a better world behind us. He has a long record of interest in climate change, the urban environment and sustainability. As his reign begins, Australians know that we have a friend who celebrates our successes and stands with us in our times of disaster and distress, and a friend with a deep and abiding interest in issues relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. His Majesty is no stranger to our shores. As a 17-year-old in 1966, he spent six months at Geelong Grammar School's Timbertop campus in the Victorian High Country. Recounting the story years later, he told an Australia Day crowd in London, 'If you want to develop character, go to Australia.' He has also professed his enduring love for the experience and described how it left him with a huge affection for our country—and I can assure the parliament that, when I have had the privilege of having an audience with King Charles, that affection has shone through. We look forward to welcoming him once again to Australia. This time, as one of 15 countries, it will be as our head of state. When the King's mother, Elizabeth II, acceded to the throne on 6 February 1952, Australia's parliament expressed its faith in her as she took on the great responsibilities of the Crown and wished her a rich and kind reign. The world has changed radically since then, and Australia has grown into a mature and diverse nation, confident about who we are and our place in the world. As a mature nation, we will continue to examine our own constitutional arrangements and determine what they should be. King Charles has made it clear that these are matters that are rightly determined by nations of the Commonwealth and that those decisions are to be respected. It was an honour to attend the coronation and have private audiences with King Charles and the Prince of Wales, Prince William, and meetings with other members of the royal family, including the Princess of Wales. Along with the Governor-General and Mrs Hurley, High Commissioner Stephen Smith and the governors of all of our states, Australia's representatives reflected our nation's diversity at the request of the palace. Our flagbearer was Sam Kerr OAM, the Matildas captain, forward for Chelsea Football Club—who I note scored another goal overnight—Olympian, Australia's leading goalscorer and the world's best footballer. There were three Victoria Cross recipients: Corporal Mark Donaldson VC, Corporal Daniel Keighran VC and the absolutely legendary and delightful Keith Payne VC. For those who've had the privilege of meeting Keith, they will know exactly what I'm saying here. He is a larger-than-life character who honours Australia every time he represents us. Leanne Benjamin AM OBE performed as a principal ballet dancer for the Royal Ballet for 21 years. She is a patron of the Tait Memorial Trust, an annual award given in her name to support young Australian and New Zealand dancers to train in the UK. Nick Cave AO is a singer, songwriter, actor, novelist and screenwriter, and a major contributor to Australian music, culture and heritage. Jasmine Coe is a Wiradjuri British artist and the creator and curator of Coe Gallery, the first and only Aboriginal owned art gallery in the United Kingdom. Adam Hills MBE is a comedian, presenter, writer and disability rights advocate. Doctor Daniel Nour is the founder of Street Side Medics, a not-for-profit GP-led mobile medical service for people experiencing homelessness. It has been my privilege to recently be with Dr Nour in Parramatta, seeing firsthand the work that his remarkable charity does. In 2002 Dr Nour was awarded Young Australian of the Year. Yasmin Poole is a public speaker, board director and youth advocate. She is currently a Rhodes scholar at Oxford university and a non-executive board director of OzHarvest and YWCA Australia. Emily Regan is a London based nurse who worked for the UK's National Health Service in the emergency department of a major hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic. Minette Salmon is studying a PhD in genomic medicine and statistics at Oxford under the prestigious Wellcome Trust studentship. She was also the 2019 Charles Perkins scholar. Claire Spencer AM is an arts leader and the inaugural CEO of the Barbican Centre. She is also an advocate for wellbeing and equity and a member of Chief Executive Women. Professor Merryn Voysey is Associate Professor of Statistics in Vaccinology at the Oxford Vaccine Group. She helped to develop the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine. Richard Joyes CV was awarded the Cross of Valour in 2003 for his courageous efforts following the Bali bombing. He helped to rescue the wounded and carried them to safety. Yvonne Kenny AM is one of the most distinguished sopranos of her generation. She debuted at the Royal Opera House in Covent Garden in 1975, where she performed as a member of the company until 1994. She is currently the chair of the Australian Music Foundation UK and, as a professor of voice, she's now dedicated to mentoring young singers. They are a remarkable group of Australians. I thank the high commissioner for hosting us at Stoke Lodge in the lead-up to the coronation. These Australians were all proud to represent their nation. They did us proud in their representation. Together we had the privilege of witnessing history. We wish their majesties a prosperous reign, and may this new Carolean age see the triumph of progress and peace. 12:12 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson Australians were glued to their televisions on Saturday night to watch our new King and Queen crowned. It was a wonderful occasion. It was historical, heartening and happy. As we watched on, we were all proud to see the Prime Minister and the Governor-General there on behalf of our nation. I want to acknowledge you, Prime Minister; His Excellency General the Hon. David Hurley; and the entire Australian delegation. Each of you represented Australia with grace and dignity. It was a great credit to each of you. Most of us have only ever lived under one monarch, such was the extraordinary 70-year reign of Queen Elizabeth II. Thus the crowning of King Charles III, our new sovereign, and Queen Camilla, who was at his side, was a truly momentous occasion. It was a momentous occasion for the British people, for Australians and for all citizens of the Commonwealth. It was a moment when an age-old tradition brought with it both a sense of reconnection to history and regeneration in our times. It was a moment of celebration that resonated around the world. Charles was the longest-serving heir apparent in British history. He was the boy who waited, the prince of patience and a king seven decades in the making. No other royal has journeyed longer to sit on the British throne and no other royal has been so prepared to wear the crown. Succeeding her father on the throne at age 25, Elizabeth was the Queen that we came to know and, succeeding his mother on the throne at age 73, Charles is the King that we already know. We know that he will be a decent, dedicated and well-disposed King. In his biography of Charles, Christopher Andersen recounted Elizabeth's coronation day. The newly crowned Queen emerged onto the balcony at Buckingham Palace cheered by a crowd of one million Britons. Next to her of course was her four-year-old son, Charles. In that moment the boy first understood how much his mother was loved by her people. In that moment young Charles first grasped the importance of the bond between the people and their monarch, a bond which held that country together and a bond that kept the Commonwealth united and strong. In his first speech as King on 9 September last year, which the Prime Minister referenced earlier, Charles said that his beloved mother was an inspiration and example to him. In that address Charles's renewed promise of lifelong service echoed the promise his mother made on her 21st birthday. The King went on to say: Wherever you may live in the United Kingdom, or in the realms and territories across the world, and whatever may be your background or beliefs, I shall endeavour to serve you with loyalty, respect and love, as I have throughout my life. In his Commonwealth Day address on 13 March, the King described the Commonwealth as a constant in his life, as an association of shared values, common purpose, joint action and extraordinary potential. He said: The myriad connections between our nations have sustained and enriched us for more than seven decades. Our commitment to peace, progress and opportunity will sustain us for many more. Our sovereign has a great affinity, as we know, for Australia. In many ways it was Charles's first trip to Australia which transformed the boy into the man. The Queen and Prince Philip arranged for young Charles to attend Geelong Grammar School on an exchange program in 1966, particularly to attend the remote Timbertop campus in the foothills of the Victorian alps. There, students received traditional classroom lessons combined with activities in the bush to develop resilience, self-reliance and strength. If Prince Philip had hoped the experience would test the young Charles' mettle and put some steel in him, he was right, for soon the 17-year-old prince was hiking, cross-country running, fishing, chopping wood and supervising younger students. He learned about natural history, and he encountered every Englishman's worst nightmare: huntsman spiders, tiger snakes, dragon lizards, leeches, fruit bats and bull ants. Meanwhile, under the guidance of history head Michael Collins Persse, with whom he would develop a lifelong friendship, Charles worked away at his A-levels, and in his public appearances, like meeting lifesavers at Bondi Beach, the prince would learn to conquer his paralysing fear of crowds. Collins Persse later reflected: Everybody sooner or later discovered that … they had in their midst not only an inevitable celebrity, but a human being of extraordinary warmth and worth … …   …   … … the resulting affection and understanding between him and Australians at large is a bond much appreciated by many. The Charles who left our country was transformed. He was a very different figure from the shy boy who only six months earlier had skipped down the air stairs of a Qantas Boeing 707 in Sydney to nervously meet Governor-General Casey, Prime Minister Holt and their wives. In 1988, when Charles was in Australia for the bicentenary celebrations, he would reflect on that first trip down under. He described it as by far the best part of his entire education and something he would always cherish. Charles has visited our nation on 16 occasions spanning 10 different prime ministers. Notably, he attended the funerals of prime ministers Holt and Menzies on behalf of the Queen. He celebrated the 200th anniversaries of both James Cook's and the First Fleet's arrivals in Australia. He inaugurated the Anglo-Australian Telescope at Siding Spring in New South Wales, and he visited towns and cities across the country. He opened the Commonwealth Games on the Gold Coast. Unexpected moments have stayed with us too—the prince being interviewed on Countdown by Molly Meldrum, his emerging from the surf at Cottesloe Beach to be kissed by an audacious Jane Priest, and his cool-headed return to the lectern on Australia Day after being shot at by a student with a starting pistol. Our sovereign appreciates all too well our harsh and unforgiving climate. Never has Charles been remiss in sending wishes to Australians besieged by bushfires, floods and other natural disasters. At an Australian bushfire appeal in London in 2020 he said: Amidst the horror and the sorrow, I have … felt the greatest possible sense of admiration for the extraordinary determination and resilience of the Australian people. Over many years King Charles III has got to know Australians, and Australians have got to know him. We have come to know the philanthropist who has established more than 20 charities and is a patron of hundreds more, the aviator who flew planes for the RAF and helicopters for the Royal Navy, the conservationist who has passionately campaigned for environmental protection and sustainability since his first public speech aged 21 and the enthusiastic spectator and sportsman who has dabbled in many sports and is a very keen and fierce advocate for the arts in all their forms. At the 1988 bicentennial celebrations, Charles said: There is no point now in trying to gloss over the circumstances in which the country, of which you are rightly proud, began. He spoke of our nation's harsh beginnings and the hardship for all—for Indigenous Australians, the original people of this land; for the convicts sent against this will to an unknown country, which would have felt like another prison. But Charles also spoke of the Australian achievement, of the intelligence and courage of brave men and women who, in an astonishingly brief time, in a heartbeat of history, created a whole new free country. He spoke proudly of Australia being its own creation, a democracy which has become a model for the world, and of how that creation became the British gift of the rule of law. Profoundly, he said: The true celebration of this nation is in its constitution. In those dry-sounding but hard fought for rules and regulations, every family in this remarkable country has its rights protected and cherished. With our sovereign and his queen crowned, we celebrate change, but we also celebrate our historical connections with Britain and the British inheritance: representative democracy, parliamentary sovereignty, the rule of law, the separation of powers, the English language, and freedom of speech, of association, the press and much more besides. May we never take this British inheritance for granted. May we continue to be custodians and defenders in the spirit of our own unique Australian creation, and may we always be proud of our British origins, along with our Indigenous heritage and our migration and multicultural success—three strands of our national story. King Charles is our head of state. In the crowning of a new king and all that the monarch symbolises, we remind ourselves of those British institutions and values which our forebears drew upon to forge a modern nation. Just like his mother, King Charles does not yearn for a return to empire. He understands that this is a vestige of the past, that the empire has receded into history. Importantly, our sovereign respects the right of the peoples of the Commonwealth to define their own destinies. In a speech on Australia Day in '94, the Prince said: … there are those who would wish to see such a rapidly changing world reflected by a change in Australia's institutions … it is also not surprising that there are differing views: some people will doubtless prefer the stability of a system that has been reasonably well-tried and tested over the years … The point I want to make here … is that this is something which only you—the Australian people—can decide. The Prince went on to say that he will always have 'an enormous affection' for our country, 'whatever course Australians ultimately decide upon', and in the meantime all his family 'will continue to take a close, personal interest in the welfare and fortunes of this country'. Those words, I think, show the humility, grace, generosity and understanding befitting a modern monarch. Our new King's virtues and values echo what we saw in our dearly departed Queen. Today, on behalf of the coalition and joining with this House, I congratulate Their Majesties. Question agreed to, honourable members standing in their places. CONDOLENCES 4 CONDOLENCES Kerin, Hon. John Charles, AM, AO, FTSE 4 Reference to Federation Chamber 6 12:33 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare that the resumption of the debate on the Prime Minister's motion of condolence in connection with the death of the Hon. John Charles Kerin is referred to the Federation Chamber. West, Hon. Stewart John 6 Reference to Federation Chamber 7 12:41 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare the resumption of debate on the Prime Minister's motion of condolence in connection with the death of the Hon. Stewart John West is referred to the Federation Chamber. BUSINESS 7 BUSINESS Orders of the Day 7 12:42 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare that Federation Chamber order of the day No. 2, government business relating to the address-in-reply, is returned to the House for further consideration. The SPEAKER 53517 The matter will be set down for consideration at a later hour this day. GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH 7 GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S SPEECH Address-in-Reply 7 12:42 The SPEAKER 53517 I have ascertained that His Excellency the Governor-General will be pleased to receive the address-in-reply, at Government House, at 10 am on Thursday 11 May 2023. I should be glad if the mover of and the seconder to the motion, together with other honourable members, would accompany me to present the address. BUSINESS 8 BUSINESS Suspension of Standing and Sessional Orders 8 12:43 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: —That: (1) standing order 31 (automatic adjournment of the House) and standing order 33 (limit on business) be suspended for the sitting on Tuesday, 9 May 2023; (2) so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent, on Thursday, 11 May 2023:    (a) the meeting of the House commencing at 12 noon, to enable the Address-in-Reply to be presented to His Excellency the Governor-General; and    (b) the Federation Chamber not meeting; and (3) standing order 31 (automatic adjournment of the House) be suspended for the sitting on Thursday, 11 May 2023 and at that sitting, after the Leader of the Opposition completes his reply to the Budget speech, the House automatically to stand adjourned until 10 am on Monday, 22 May 2023, unless the Speaker or, in the event of the Speaker being unavailable, the Deputy Speaker, fixes an alternative day or hour of meeting. For the information of members, this is the normal resolution that we have on a budget week to allow for the budget speech to be given and for the necessary legislation and appropriations to be introduced immediately after the budget speech. We have added the principle of the no divisions or quorums after 6.30 pm, so it's different in that regard. There are the normal principles for the address-in-reply from the Leader of the Opposition on Thursday night. The House, on each occasion, will be suspended between roughly 6 pm and 7.30 pm. This motion is also different from the normal one in the sense that on Thursday we will not start until midday to be consistent with the information from the Governor-General which the Speaker has just reported to the House. I commend the resolution. Question agreed to. BILLS 8 BILLS Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2023, Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023, Family Law Amendment Bill 2023, Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023, Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2023 8

Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2023

Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023

Family Law Amendment Bill 2023

Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023

Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2023

Reference to Federation Chamber 8 12:44 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare that, unless otherwise ordered, the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2023, the Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023, the Family Law Amendment Bill 2023, the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023 and the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2023 are referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of each bill. National Reconstruction Fund Corporation Bill 2023, Royal Commissions Amendment (Enhancing Engagement) Bill 2023, Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2023, Australia Council Amendment (Creative Australia) Bill 2023, National Health Amendment (Effect of Prosecution—Approved Pharmacist Corporations) Bill 2023, Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Information Disclosure, National Interest and Other Measures) Bill 2022, Workplace Gender Equality Amendment (Closing the Gender Pay Gap) Bill 2023 8

National Reconstruction Fund Corporation Bill 2023

Royal Commissions Amendment (Enhancing Engagement) Bill 2023

Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2023

Australia Council Amendment (Creative Australia) Bill 2023

National Health Amendment (Effect of Prosecution—Approved Pharmacist Corporations) Bill 2023

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

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

Assent 8 COMMITTEES 9 COMMITTEES Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice Referendum Joint Select Committee 9 Membership 9 12:45 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a message from the Senate informing the House that Senators Bragg and Liddle have been appointed as members of the Joint Select Committee on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice Referendum. Health, Aged Care and Sport Committee 9 Report 9 12:45 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur On behalf of the Standing Committee on Health, Aged Care and Sport, I present the committee's report entitled Sick and tired: casting a long shadow—inquiry into long COVID and repeated COVID infections, together with minutes of proceedings. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Dr FREELANDER 265979 by leave—This report was the culmination of a series of really long and hard work by the committee members and the secretariat. I would like to commend all the committee members: my deputy chair, Melissa McIntosh, the member for Lindsay; Dr Michelle Ananda-Rajah, the member for Higgins; Mark Coulton, the member for Parkes; Peta Murphy, the member for Dunkley; Gordon Reid, the member for Robertson; Monique Ryan, the member for Kooyong; Anne Stanley, the member for Werriwa; and Jenny Ware, the member for Hughes. I'd like to also commend the committee secretariat: Clare Anderson, Kate Portus, Kate Morris, Cassie Davis and Cathy Rouland. Without their enormous professionalism, diligence, experience and unfailing goodwill and good humour, this inquiry would not have been achievable. The report itself was comprehensive, and it will set a framework for the government's ability to now deal with long COVID, which is a serious issue not just for our health system but economically, in terms of its effect on our productivity. There has been much media regarding this report since it was first published. I'm very pleased to thank the Minister for Health and Aged Care, Mark Butler, who was the initiator of the inquiry, for the $50 million package for research regarding long COVID, which will be very important in planning how we deal with the many twists and turns of this pandemic in the future—in terms of long COVID in particular. I am happy with all the work done by the committee members and the secretariat. We have achieved much already in terms of knowledge and understanding of long COVID, but there is much to be done. We don't know what we don't know, and much will be discovered, I'm sure, over the ensuing years. What I do know is that long COVID is having an effect on our population. It is in particular affecting women more than men. It is affecting people in the most productive years of their lives—often those who have employment, have families and have commitments in our society in general. I commend the report to the House. I'd like to give whatever further time I have to the deputy chair and others who may want to speak on the report. 12:49 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay by leave—I'd like to acknowledge the chair, Dr Mike Freelander, the member for Macarthur, for his outstanding leadership of this inquiry—the first inquiry of its kind in this country into long COVID. When we started this inquiry I had been having my own experience with persistent symptoms after contracting COVID in April 2022. I wasn't able to find in the public sphere adequate information about what I was experiencing—and I wasn't alone in this. I believe the health committee inquiry could be useful, at least in terms of filling an information gap. There had yet to be an official inquiry, as I said. What we didn't know at the start of the inquiry was that it's not so much an information gap as a data, diagnosis and treatment gulf. We don't yet have a definition of what long COVID is in Australia, let alone have consistency in how people are diagnosed and then looked after. The committee recommends that the World Health Organization definition of long COVID be used at this time. But the definition has its failings, including not being quite clear enough for clinical purposes. Despite this, without an official definition people just can't get the care they need, whether it be through their GP, who may not have received adequate education on long COVID, or via a long-COVID clinic, which we heard have some extraordinary waiting times, leaving people without proper treatment for up to a year. I've also come to realise that the relatively short symptoms of breathlessness and fatigue that I had were very mild compared to how much some people around the country are suffering with long COVID. They're so sick they can barely get out of bed many months after the onset of their symptoms. Long COVID is having a major impact on lives and livelihoods. The committee received almost 570 submissions during the inquiry, and it is clear the committee has uncovered a very significant condition that could affect between two and 20 per cent of people infected with COVID. The lack of a precise number reflects the whole problem we have with understanding long COVID in this country: we just don't have the data. The No. 1 recommendation of the inquiry is the establishment of a COVID-19 database, including the recording of long-COVID diagnoses and complications. Data linkages with the states and territories are essential for its effectiveness as, ultimately, it needs to be about consistency in diagnosis and treatment of people with long COVID, no matter where they live in Australia. Not too long after we started the inquiry, my very athletic and healthy 19-year-old son Byron was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. It is well known that certain viruses can trigger type 1, which is an autoimmune disease, and the only known virus that Byron had before diagnosis was COVID. When Byron was diagnosed in October 2022 there was very little data on whether it was plausible that COVID caused it, but reports were starting to surface that there had been a surge in type 1 diabetes globally amongst children and adolescents. Six months later, research is showing a correlation between COVID and type 1 diabetes, and the committee was provided evidence of this during the inquiry. The Victorian Department of Health noted that long COVID may be associated with more serious issues, such as increased risk of developing diabetes. Diabetes Australia told the committee that research funding should be made available to further investigate COVID related new-onset diabetes. The increased prevalence of disease is not just reflected in all cases of type 1. The evidence heard by the committee about what COVID can do to your body makes for less than light bedtime reading. The Australian Society for Medical Research advised that future research needs to include how a COVID infection can initiate the development of conditions that evolve over time to cause organ dysfunction or increase the risk of developing other disorders. The committee made a recommendation to the Australian government that funding is required for coordinated and thorough research into long COVID. As deputy chair of the committee, I would highly encourage that this include research into the serious diseases that are developing in people that have contracted COVID. It's a public-health imperative. Before I finish, I just want to touch on COVID and mental health. This is another area that is suffering from a lack of evidence for whether the mental health impacts of long COVID are a biological or a psychological response to having long COVID—or possibly both. It is clear from the inquiry that, for many people, long COVID is having a significant mental health impact, which can be debilitating and life-changing. As the shadow assistant minister for mental health and suicide prevention, it concerns me greatly to hear from individuals about their declining mental health, including feelings of uselessness, anxiety and depression. The committee has recommended that mental health support for those with long COVID must be provided in an affordable, timely and equitable manner. I would like to see the government prioritise this recommendation. We're experiencing a mental health crisis in this country, and the seriousness of this should not be underestimated. This first-of-its-kind inquiry into long COVID has given thousands of people across Australia hope that politicians as policymakers are listening. It is clear there are unacceptable gaps in data and research and inconsistencies in diagnosis and treatment, particularly when it comes to where people live and their socio-economic status. The inquiry has provided the evidence that it doesn't have to be this way. There are ready-to-go solutions in the committee's recommendations, and I'd like to commend the chair again for his wonderful leadership and work. Those recommendations just needed to be actioned. As deputy chair of the health committee, I endorse them and hope that we see some strong commitments in the government's budget. 12:55 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I move: That the House take note of the report. The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D In accordance with standing order 39(d), the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Reference to Federation Chamber 10 12:55 Dr FREELANDER 265979 Macarthur I move: That the order of the day be referred to the Federation Chamber for debate. Question agreed to. Public Works Joint Committee 10 Report 10 12:56 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton On behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, I present the committee's report No. 3 of 2023 entitled Cocos (Keeling) Islands—West Island, Seawater Reverse Osmosis Plant Project and other works. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr PERRETT HVP by leave—This report considers three proposals referred to the committee in February and March with a combined value of just under $104 million. The first proposal, from the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, is for a seawater reverse osmosis plant for the Cocos (Keeling) Islands's West Island, which we visited. The second proposal, from the Australian Taxation Office, is for a fit-out of existing leased premises at 200 Collins Street, Hobart, Tasmania. The third proposal, from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, is for the proposed construction and decommissioning of the Australian Pavilion at the World Expo 2025 in Osaka, Kansai, Japan. The department of infrastructure's reverse osmosis plant will bring water security to the important community of West Island. The only current water supply for the community is considered extremely vulnerable to contamination, a threat that is compounded by the risk of further contamination during the upcoming airfield upgrades. The total cost of the proposed project is $19.6 million. The committee considers that this project is of the utmost importance to ensure that the community of West Island has permanent access to safe drinking water. The committee is aware that the island's community is looking forward to a secure and reliable water source. This plant will also support future economic and tourism development on Cocos (Keeling) Islands. The second proposal in this report is the ATO's fit-out of existing leased premises at 200 Collins Street, Hobart. The total cost of the proposed project is just under $24½ million. At our public hearing, the committee heard about staff concerns that there had been a lack of consultation in relation to the project. The CPSU believed that there had been missed opportunities in the design process for workers to participate and share their views. The committee was somewhat reassured by the ATO, who discussed that design changes have been made based on feedback and that there would be more opportunities for feedback on the final design. The committee still has concerns and has recommended that the ATO should be conducting broader staff consultation during the design phase of future fit-outs, which should be reflected in any future submissions to the committee. The third project in this report is the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's proposed construction and decommissioning of the Australian Pavilion for the World Expo in Osaka. The total cost of the public works is $59.8 million. Australia's participation in the 2025 World Expo came at the request of the Japanese government and will offer an important opportunity for Australia to further strengthen its relationship with a key strategic and economic partner. Although the expo pavilion will be built and then removed after six months, the committee is satisfied that DFAT is considering environmental impact and options for waste reduction. The committee supports this project. The committee would like to extend its thanks to all those who provided written and oral evidence in support of these inquiries. We'd also like to thank personnel from the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts, the ATO and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for their presentations on these projects and for facilitating site inspections in Hobart and on Cocos (Keeling) Islands. For each project, the committee recommends that it's expedient that the proposed works be carried out. I commend the report to the House. 13:00 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler by leave—I will make a very brief contribution. I acknowledge the work of the chairman of the committee on these very important matters—particularly on Cocos (Keeling) Islands, which we know are critical in terms of Australia's forward-facing infrastructure, particularly for Defence and others. I also acknowledge the forbearance of those that live on the Cocos (Keeling) Islands. They will have a competitive edge and competitive costs when it comes to the matter of the seawater reverse osmosis plant project, which is relatively unique: saltwater bores enter reverse osmosis to provide fresh water for the residents that live there, along with a number of others who live on the defence base, and for the airport et cetera. Unfortunately, I couldn't make it to the tax office facility in Tasmania, so I'll leave that alone. But I will come to recommendation 4, in regard to the proposed work by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade at the World Expo 2025 Osaka facility. We did have long discussions—as acknowledged by the chair and others—and I thank DFAT and others for putting forward their propositions. Whilst it is supported, I do still have concerns about the cost of the proposal, at $60 million, but it is up to the government to demonstrate value for money. Japan is a critical partner in trade, along with a number of other matters on which we deal with them on an international level. I also had some concerns about DFAT's priorities, in terms of what was being put forward on the forward-facing part of the facility and the pavilion, given that our major exports to Japan are coal and gas, and our major reasons for trading with them are around coal and gas exports and of course the opportunities for tourism and education on a two-way-trade basis. It didn't seem that that lined up with DFAT's priorities for the expo. I do look forward to seeing them have a successful expo, and I congratulate them on the work they do, but I am concerned about the cost, given what has been expended on previous expos around the world, and as to whether it's value for money. I thank the committee. I thank all of those who showed up as witnesses. And I thank you for your forbearance, Mr Deputy Speaker. BILLS 12 BILLS Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2023 12

Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2023

Second Reading 12 13:02 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa I rise today to speak on the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2023. The federal coalition wholeheartedly supports this bill because what this legislation delivers is the policy that we, on this side of the House, announced while we were in government and enshrines it in law. The federal coalition has always supported northern Australia, and we are extremely proud of our achievements and the legacy that we secured for this part of the nation during our time in office. It was the federal coalition who first set up the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility, the NAIF, in 2016, which was a landmark investment platform designed to drive economic infrastructure across the north. It was the federal coalition who developed the northern Australia white paper to outline the challenges and opportunities that exist in an area which covers more than half of our land mass, and it is the federal coalition that continues to fight for those regional communities to ensure that those who grow our food, mine our resources and build our nation get the recognition they rightfully deserve. Under our government, the NAIF made over 31 investment decisions, totalling $3.4 billion, supporting projects with an estimated total capital value of $6.5 billion across northern Australia. These projects range from airports and higher education facilities to clean energy infrastructure, resources and agricultural ventures. The projects that the NAIF supported are forecast to generate around $25 billion in economic benefits and create more than 13,000 jobs. Importantly, the coalition extended the NAIF's lifetime by an additional five years, to 30 June 2026, so that it could continue delivering critical investments to the northern regions. Under the legislation before the House today, there are two substantive amendments within the bill and one technical clarification. The first substantive amendment expands the NAIF's area of operation. In December 2021, the federal coalition announced that the Indian Ocean territories of Christmas Island and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands would be included in the NAIF's jurisdiction and able to receive support. This extension will allow the NAIF to continue delivering vital investments in more parts of northern Australia. The Indian Ocean territories have so much potential to capitalise on, including sustainable tourism, with their incredible biodiversity and unique landscapes. The inclusion of the Indian Ocean territories in the NAIF will help incentivise private sector investment in these regions and support businesses in the Indian Ocean territories to diversify and grow. This expansion opens up a variety of opportunities for the region, especially in the tourism sector, and enables local businesses to tap into their natural competitive advantage and provide jobs for the future. The second substantive amendment in the bill is to increase the NAIF's funding from $5 billion to $7 billion. This is an important measure that we fully support. In fact, it was the federal coalition that further committed to strengthening the development of northern Australia by announcing, back in January last year, a $2 billion funding increase for the NAIF from $5 billion to $7 billion. This increase will support additional projects throughout northern Australia, and it's good to see the government honour this commitment. Ultimately, the government's backing of these two coalition announcements is a true affirmation and recognition of the great policy that we developed for northern Australia. It should be noted that, following the statutory review of the NAIF in December 2020, the federal coalition moved amendments to the act in 2021. As part of the extended scope, amendments were made to allow the NAIF to provide financial assistance to entities other than states and territories and to provide loans in addition to grants. This expanded availability for support includes regional Indigenous Australians and provides an avenue for economic growth and investment in local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in this part of the nation. Overall, the bill before us today is simply a technical clarification and it's a continuation of the federal coalition's policy to build the north. While it's welcome to see Labor continue to fund the NAIF, it's a huge concern to see the government slash other regional funding that is critical to northern Australia and our regional communities all over the country. This government's cuts and delays to infrastructure in regional Australia amount to billions of dollars, and northern Australia will feel the impacts of this. Giving with one hand and taking away with the other is not a formula for success. In the north it was the coalition government who delivered $1.9 billion for the Roads of Strategic Importance initiative, committed an extra $678 million for the Outback Way and secured $300 million under the Northern Australia Beef Roads Program. The coalition government fought hard to deliver tremendous amounts of federal funding to build critical infrastructure in the north. Rest assured that the coalition will continue to fight for northern Australia. I'm pleased to confirm that we will support this bill, which puts the coalition policy into law. Debate adjourned. Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023 13

Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023

Second Reading 13 13:07 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland On behalf of the coalition I rise to speak on the Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023, which is before the House. The purpose of this bill is to amend the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to give partial effect to the government's response to the Independent Review of Infrastructure Australia, which was released on 7 December last year. Reviewing Infrastructure Australia was a pre-election commitment of the government, and the independent review of this body was announced on 22 July 2022. It was undertaken by two respected Australians: Nicole Lockwood, Chairperson of Infrastructure Western Australia, and my good friend Mike Mrdak AO, a former secretary of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development and a former secretary of the Department of Communications and the Arts. Infrastructure Australia is a corporate Commonwealth entity that was established by the Rudd government in 2008. It's also worth noting that this body is in fact a creation of our current Prime Minister when he served as the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government in that era. It's quite telling that this government has assessed the performance of Infrastructure Australia over its nearly 15-year life and found the organisation wanting. This bill represents, at the very least, a partial repudiation of the organisation's functions and governance structures as they were fundamentally established by the now Prime Minister himself. The bill provides a new object of the act—for Infrastructure Australia to be the government's independent adviser on nationally significant infrastructure investment planning and project prioritisation. This gives partial effect to recommendation 1 of the independent review. The coalition notes the independent review's first recommendation to the government includes the advice that Infrastructure Australia 's mandate should be expanded beyond advising on nationally significant transport, energy, communication and water infrastructure to also be the government's independent adviser on nationally significant social and economic infrastructure. Recommendation 6 of the independent review also suggested Infrastructure Australia's remit be expanded to include social infrastructure. These recommendations have been rejected by the government and are therefore not featured in this bill. The bill also repeals almost all of the current functions of Infrastructure Australia as provided in sections in 5(a) to (gb) and sections 5A to 5C of the current act. In place of Infrastructure Australia's current functions the bill proposes a series of new functions and products to conduct audits or assessments of nationally significant infrastructure to determine adequacy and needs, to conduct or endorse evaluation of infrastructure projects, to develop targeted infrastructure lists and plans and to provide advice on nationally significant infrastructure matters. The bill also amends the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to replace the current 12-member Infrastructure Australia board with three commissioners appointed by the minister, comprising a chief commissioner and two commissioners. Additionally, transitional arrangements are included in the bill, to recognise the existing work of Infrastructure Australia. What we have here in this bill is the government admitting that the legislative structure put in place originally by the now Prime Minister needs to be fixed, and as a result they have decided to give Infrastructure Australia a new object, new functions and a completely new governance structure. While this bill is framed as giving effect to the recommendations of the independent review, it's important to place on the public record that a critical assessment of the response to the review shows the government has not in fact accepted some of its key recommendations. The review received 59 submissions and held 40 meetings with approximately 140 participants across government and industry. In October 2022 the independent review provided its report to the government, outlining 16 recommendations and a further matter for government consideration. As mentioned, the government's response to the independent review did not support a number of the report's recommendations. In fact, eight of the 16 were not supported. The government did not support key recommendations to provide enhanced transparency. An example of this was the proposal that Infrastructure Australia provide two new annual statements to the government, which would be publicly tabled to inform budget processes and to report on the performance outcomes being achieved by the infrastructure investment program. Also, a proposal that the Australian government must formally and publicly respond to Infrastructure Australia's advice, findings and recommendations within six months was not supported by this government. Despite what the government says, the Australian people can clearly see this administration has an aversion to being transparent. The government also did not support the recommendation to form an infrastructure bodies council to enable better collaboration and coordination between Infrastructure Australia and the states and territories. Several other recommendations of the independent review will be implemented via non-legislative processes, including by a ministerial statement of expectations and an infrastructure policy statement on land transport. The independent review proposed three alternative models for the future governance of Infrastructure Australia: option 1 was to maintain the status quo; option 2 was to establish a commission model, which was their preferred model; and option 3 was for a streamlined board model. The proposal in this bill represents an altered version of option 2. By proposing to replace the 12-member Infrastructure Australia board with three commissioners, the government is reducing the diversity of expertise at the head of this body and reducing its independence from government. The views of the minister will hold significant influence with the three commissioners, who are themselves appointed by the minister. This compares with the current governance model, whereby nine Infrastructure Australia board members are appointed by the government and three are appointed from nominations agreed by the governments of the states, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. When added to the redefined functions of Infrastructure Australia in this bill, which require the commissioners to have regard for the government's policies and require them to evaluate infrastructure proposals submitted by the government, it's clear Infrastructure Australia will enjoy less independence in the future. In addition, the government has confirmed via briefings that an advisory council will be established by Infrastructure Australia to provide advice to the commissioners. Unfortunately, the advisory council is not referenced in the bill, and therefore the parliament is not being invited to set guidelines about the composition or role of that proposed advisory council. The coalition reserves the right to have more to say on this during the debate in the other place. However, briefings have confirmed the government's intention, as outlined in their response to the review, that senior officials from the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Department of the Treasury and the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts will sit on the advisory council, supported by three to four experts from the infrastructure and labour sectors. This is the heavy hand of the Commonwealth government stepping in to influence the decisions and the direction of Infrastructure Australia. There is a concern here that, in making these changes of the government's to Infrastructure Australia, industry expertise may be lost, as well as expertise and experience in delivering infrastructure in regional Australia in particular. The government has made no provision in the bill for commissioners to be appointed who have expertise and experience in the issues impacting regional Australia. The coalition will therefore propose amendments during consideration in detail to address this concern, and I encourage the government and all members of this place to give close consideration to supporting these. In addition to making Infrastructure Australia less independent, the government's reforms will make Infrastructure Australia a less authoritative body when it comes to the evaluation of infrastructure projects. Firstly, the minister has made it clear the government wants to shrink the number of projects on the infrastructure priority list; this is mentioned in the explanatory memorandum. Interestingly, while the relevant clause in the bill, being 5C(1), refers to the development of a targeted infrastructure priority list, nowhere in the bill does it require the list to be any smaller—or larger, for that matter—than currently exists. Indeed, the briefing provided to the coalition by the government on this bill has confirmed there is nothing in the bill which will prevent a future government from working with Infrastructure Australia to expand the infrastructure priority list if the government chooses to reduce its investments in infrastructure projects. However, by proposing to streamline Infrastructure Australia's focus on a smaller number of nationally significant projects, the government is reducing its utility. Further, and perhaps more significantly, the government is proposing Infrastructure Australia merely endorse project assessments submitted by the state and territory governments. This is a government walking away from providing independent oversight and assessment of the priorities of the state governments. While there is reference to the agency developing a national planning and assessment framework to promote national consistency in infrastructure evaluations, as a Commonwealth body Infrastructure Australia lacks the power to enforce assessment standards on state and territory departments and agencies. The Commonwealth government makes a substantial investment into public infrastructure which is delivered and ultimately owned by the states and territories. Often the Commonwealth is investing 50 per cent—or, in regional areas, 80 per cent—of the funding to deliver major road projects. Australian taxpayers expect the Commonwealth parliament to exercise suitable oversight so that infrastructure projects deliver material benefit and that maximum value for investment is secured. This should be an important role for Infrastructure Australia. But will the organisation's ability to provide advice on this be diminished by the requirement in this bill, so that they endorse the state assessments instead of running an independent ruler over project submissions themselves? The coalition recognises that, since the election, there have been questions over the future mandate and operations of Infrastructure Australia. As a result of this government's approach to the body and its leadership, in September 2022 there were five resignations from the board. This has resulted in several months where the board has lacked a quorum of members. The government has subsequently appointed interim board members until such time as its proposed reforms can be enacted. The coalition firmly believes Infrastructure Australia is an important body, and it's important that parliament provides the organisation with a clear mandate for its future activities. In this regard, the federal coalition does not seek to frustrate passage of the government's legislation—albeit there are concerns that this bill will result in Infrastructure Australia being less independent and less authoritative. The coalition proposes to support the legislation with amendments which will be designed to ensure that the commissioners have experience on the issues of regional communities and provide transparency where, contrary to its pre-election commitments, the government makes nationally significant infrastructure and investment decisions without obtaining advice from this body. I conclude my remarks by moving a second reading amendment to this bill: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes this Government's record of cancellations, cuts and delays to infrastructure projects across Australia; (2) criticises the Government's failure to adhere to processes of assessing infrastructure investment projects they set themselves before the 2022 election by agreeing to invest $2.2 billion in the Melbourne Suburban Rail Loop and $2.5 billion in the Brisbane Arena without first obtaining advice from Infrastructure Australia; and (3) notes the nation-building and economy strengthening $120 billion 10-year pipeline of infrastructure investments inherited by the Government upon its election in May 2022". The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Is the amendment seconded? Mr Wood E0F I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. Debate adjourned. Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 15

Family Law Amendment Bill 2023

Second Reading 15 13:20 Mr WOOD E0F La Trobe I rise to speak on the Family Law Amendment Bill 2023. There are few things in the Commonwealth Attorney-General's portfolio that have more direct impact on Australians than family law. Every year, tens of thousands of Australians will find themselves going through the pain and sadness of separation, and, in a small proportion of these cases, disputes will be decided by a judge in Australia's family law courts. As a nation, we should aim for a system that resolves those disputes as quickly and cleanly as possible and, where children are involved, we should at all times prioritise their best interests. Many parts of this bill are moved by good intentions, and we join with the government in recognising that many of the issues in this bill seek to address problems in need of a solution. And yet in too many places the proposals put forward by the government in this bill do not align with those problems. They go beyond recommendations made by previous reviews, are not supported by professionals, have unintended consequences or have not been road tested in communities on the ground. The coalition's very deep concern is that, although we join with the government in recognising the problems, the solutions in this bill are untested and may actually make things worse for Australian families. That is something that we, as legislators, should be very cautious about, particularly when we're dealing with a system that is meant to guide them through some of the most important and difficult parts of their lives. Schedule 1 of this bill deals with the parenting framework in the Family Law Act. The most significant part of this schedule would repeal the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility that applies when courts make parenting orders. The changes which introduced that presumption were one of the achievements of the Howard era. Prior to 2003 there were widespread concerns across the Australian community about contact and residency issues for children following marriage and relationship breakdowns. There was a widespread sense that many separated parents felt excluded from their children's lives following separation. Often, this turned the debate away from the benefits for children of a positive and caring relationship with both parents to all the arguments about why equal time will or will not work. This was against the backdrop of the inquiry commissioned by former prime minister Howard into the family law system, chaired by Kay Hull AO, which resulted in the landmark Every picture tells a story report. That report was remarkable in that its recommendations were unanimous and bipartisan. A rollcall of past Labor luminaries—Julia Irwin, the Hon. Graham Edwards, Jennie George AO, Hon. Roger Price and Harry Quick—joined with the coalition in recommending a rebuttable presumption of equal shared parental responsibility. Those recommendations were given effect by the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006. Among other things, those reforms said that courts must apply the presumption that it's in the best interests of a child for there to be equal shared parental responsibility. Importantly, the presumption does not apply in circumstances where there is abuse or family violence. And it is not a presumption that parenting orders should allocate time to parents on a 50 per cent basis. Rather, it's about the shared responsibility that parents have in decision-making for their children after separation. The 2006 reforms established important guardrails for courts making parental orders, but many of those guardrails would now be removed by Labor's reforms in a way that goes beyond what the evidence supports. We recognise that the law needs to keep pace with changes in society and that, where there is room for improvement, we should improve it. That is why the former coalition government initiated an ALRC inquiry into the family law system, the report of which was handed down in March 2019. The report said: The ALRC supports the idea that a presumption of shared parental responsibility serves as a good starting point for negotiations between parents and recommends that the concept be retained. The ALRC agreed 'in principle with the existing exceptions to that presumption'; however, it noted that, in practice, 'equal shared parental responsibility' had often been conflated with equal time with the children, and it recommended the provision be co-located 'with the provision creating the presumption'. Labor's amendments go much further than has been recommended. Labor proposes repealing the presumption entirely. Many across the legal profession have raised concerns. It is worth noting that the Attorney-General's consultation on the exposure draft of this bill did not ask whether the presumption should be retained. It missed the fundamental question. Instead, it asked whether its changes would make it easier to explain the law and whether, with the removal of the presumption of equal shared parental responsibility, certain other provisions should be retained. It treated the removal of the presumption as a given. Yet, despite this skewed and one-sided approach, despite this never being asked, parts of the profession have been ringing alarm bells. The Family Law Practitioners Association of Western Australian supported 'a change in labelling for the reasons identified by the ALRC'. The Hunter Valley Family Law Practitioners Association submitted that legislation should contain a presumption of the kind recommended by the ALRC. The Family Law Practitioners Association of Queensland said that the legislation removed a 'presently known pathway' and questioned whether more cases would be 'initiated on the question of parental responsibility alone'. The Law Council of Australia acknowledged the divergence of views among the profession. Among its constituent body, some said the removal of the presumption would make it more difficult to explain the law, could increase litigation and costs incurred by parties, would discourage parents from attempting to consult with each other on decisions relating to the welfare of the child, and put Australia out of step with international peers. Such a significant divergence of views should give any sensible legislator pause for thought. There is much more to be said about schedule 1 and particularly about how courts determine what is in the best interests of the child, but, in the interests of time, I will turn to other schedules. Schedule 2 is about the enforcement of child-related orders. The underlying purpose is to simplify a complex scheme. We agree it should be simplified. We think changes to the scheme should reduce costs and enhance compliance. But it remains to be seen whether schedule 2 will do this. The ACT Bar Association said: While it is agreed that the current provisions in Division 13A are a complex mess and should be simplified, the ACT BA does not consider that the proposed changes would make the division easier to understand. They are, instead, a different complex mess … ACT BA submits that the provisions should be reconsidered and consultation with the profession should occur before that reconsideration. Again, this feedback should give legislators pause for thought. Schedule 3 of the bill extends the definition of a relative for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children to include anyone who's considered a relative in that child's culture. We support this in principle, but the practical implications have not been fully considered. For example, it means that family violence includes violence amongst anyone who falls within the extended definition. It may be that the obligation to notify the court about family violence now applies to a much wider group. It is possible that people who are not involved in the court case at all could have their medical and police records subpoenaed. It may be that none of these are bad outcomes, but we just don't know how it would play out for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and communities. How will this provision affect parenting orders in Palm Island and Alice Springs? Is there any interplay with the child protection system? These issues need to be tested with communities on the grounds. Schedule 4 of the bill deals with independent children's lawyers and would establish a requirement to meet with children over the age of five, unless there are exceptional circumstances. However, as with other parts of this bill, it must be road tested. How will it affect the work of independent children's lawyers in remote and rural areas? How does a child communicate that they do not want to meet— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour, and the member will have leave to continue speaking if the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 17 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Devenish, Dookie & Districts: Good Friday Appeal 17 13:30 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls I want to acknowledge a fabulous group of people and a small community that does mighty things. Every year the Devenish Dookie & Districts Good Friday Appeal team raises money for the Royal Children's Hospital. They don't just raise money on the day; they do it throughout the year. They hold raffles, car shows and a lamb drive, and farmers raise and sell steers for the cause. Wayne and Floss Groves at the Gladstone Dookie Hotel put on a fortnightly meat tray, and a big highlight is the yabby racing on Australia Day. I had a starter in that this year, but it's still crawling! This year they raised $120,000, the second most of any regional community. To put that in context, the last census put the Dookie population at 333 and Devenish at 208. Ballarat was first—well done Ballarat, with its population of 100,000—but coming in second were two small farming communities with just over 500 people. That's a stunning effort. Over the past seven years, they've raised more than half a million dollars to help support sick children and their families. I say well done to Paul Durden and his team of volunteers and the many community groups, businesses and individuals who make such a great contribution year after year. I could not be more proud of everyone involved. You are what makes our community very special. Australian Parliament House: 35th Anniversary 17 13:31 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean Thirty-five years ago today this extraordinary building was officially opened. Thank you to the Presiding Officers for recognising this significant anniversary yesterday with our First Peoples, faith leaders and schoolchildren from across Canberra in the Great Hall. I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the over 10,000 people who were involved in the construction of this building and the tens of thousands who have worked here over the last 35 years, with some serving in both this place and Old Parliament House. I hope, and I know, that you are proud of your contribution to this incredible, significant and historic building. There are many who are only commencing their service here this week, or in recent weeks. I wish you well in the time you have here. I would particularly like to pay tribute to all who work in this building today, particularly those who take good care of it and of us: the clerks and chamber staff, committee staff, cleaners, the gardeners, the tour guides, the library staff, the security guards, the AFP, the attendants, Dom and his team at Aussies, the catering staff, the educators, the post office staff, the gym staff—who don't see me often!—and the list goes on. Thank you for your commitment to our parliament. We've done good work over the last 12 months to make this a better workplace, and we must commit to continuing that work to make it not just one of the most beautiful workplaces in Australia but a workplace that is fair and safe for all. Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 17 13:33 Mr BOYCE 299498 Flynn Regional Australians could be the hardest hit by the Labor government's planned changes to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Ahead of tonight's budget, the federal government plans to double the amount of medicines Australians can purchase, by allowing 60-day dispensing. However, experts have warned the move, which has been described as one of the biggest shake-ups the PBS has faced, could create significant medicine shortages and delays. Regional, rural and remote Australians risk being impacted by the changes, which come into effect on 1 September. The government's policy cuts $3.5 billion out of community pharmacies, cutting vital services to patients. The impact of these cuts will affect small, rural and remote pharmacies, significantly resulting in the reduction of services and opening hours and, in some cases, in closures. The Albanese government must provide a strong guarantee that this change will not harm the viability of community pharmacies and, therefore, will not be another broken promise. Community pharmacies play an integral role in the provision of primary health care in Australia, particularly in rural and regional Australia, and we do not want to see any community pharmacies close as a result of these government actions. Australian patients deserve affordable, accessible and safe access to pharmacy services. This should be true whether you live in rural and remote Australia or in a metropolitan centre. Sudan 18 13:34 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser Much of the focus today is, understandably, on the budget, but I want to acknowledge the extraordinary stress and emotional turmoil that families of Sudanese heritage everywhere, including in my electorate, are experiencing. A resilient people, they give back to this nation in so many ways. Take Mohamed Semra, who arrived here as a six-year-old with his mother and siblings after years in a refugee camp. Now 24, Mohamed is the co-founder of a social enterprise, Endeavour Youth Australia, which works in school to stamp out racism and develop the leaders of the future. His two brothers, both Australian citizens, remain trapped in Sudan. His sister-in-law is nine months pregnant and can't travel. The situation remains volatile and dangerous. Australia is deeply concerned by reports that more than 550 people have been killed and almost 5,000 injured since fighting began in Sudan on 15 April. Australia continues to work closely with international partners to evacuate Australians; some 237 Australians and their families have left Sudan. Huge efforts are also underway to provide humanitarian support. Of the $6 million in support recently announced, $1 million is for the International Committee of the Red Cross to provide medical supplies, food, water and emergency shelter. Australia continues to call on all parties to agree to a permanent cessation of hostilities. In the meantime, our thoughts remain with the Sudanese community. Petition: Census and Statistics Act 1905 18 13:36 Mr BATES 300246 Brisbane Today I rise to table this petition, calling on the House to make changes to the Census and Statistics Act 1905 to legally mandate the inclusion of LGBTQIA+ people within the census. This petition has been considered by the Petitions Committee and found to be an order. It calls attention to the fact that the Australian Bureau of Statistics does not currently collect data on LGBTQIA+ people. I thank the petitioner, Evalyn Venture, who is in the gallery today, for all her work on gathering 4,946 signatures and bringing light to this issue. The data collection omission by the ABS means that governments and support services are unable to understand the health and wellbeing needs of queer people. Therefore, they cannot sufficiently plan for both the development of policy and allocation of resources for LGBTQIA+ communities. In the 2021 census, the ABS failed to adequately collect data on transgender, non-binary and gender diverse people, conflating gender identity and sex. While it counted same-sex marriages and some LGBTQIA+ people who live with their partner, it failed to identify queer people who were not living with or married to their partner at the time. These omissions amount to our community's erasure by the government and the ABS, and it must change. They have the opportunity to change this policy in the lead-up to the 2026 census. They must take it; it is time to count us in. The petition read as follows— In 2021, despite a campaign with the support of over 100 peak bodies, health experts, and community organisations; data collection about LGBTIQA+ Australians were dropped due to the conservative position of the Chief Statistician within the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This essentially means that neither the federal or state governments within Australia have any definitive data about lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and gender diverse, intersex, queer and other sexuality and bodily diverse Australians within their communities; or the intersectionality of this data with other factors such as health, income, culture, location, etc. The lack of current population-level data limits understanding of health and wellbeing needs of LGBTIQA+ people, and both the development of policy and allocation of resources for LGBTIQA+ communities We therefore ask the House to makes changes to the Census and Statistics Act 1905 to legally mandate the inclusion of LGBTIQA+ data within the census. The Chief Statistician's current authority to include this data per the Act "as he or she considers appropriate" subjects marginalised people such as LGBTIQA+ Australians to the personal bias of a singular individual. No one person has the right to say that a group of people are invalid and do not deserve to be counted, and this authority needs to be stripped away and replaced with statutory directives mandating the collection of this data. from 4,946 citizens (Petition No. EN4848) Petition received. Holt Electorate: Pearcedale Primary School 18 13:37 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt There is nothing better in being a local MP than visiting schools and engaging with students from your electorate. I had that great pleasure again when I visited Pearcedale Primary School to speak to the grade 6 cohort and host a Q&A with them. I was joined by the fantastic state member for Bass, Jordan Crugnale, and we made an effective team in answering all questions related to federal and state governments. There were some fantastic questions, ranging from how our great democracy works all the way through to individual issues and which level of government looks after what. In fact, last Wednesday the grade 6 cohort were here in Canberra for an educational tour on how our parliament works, so they were quite prepared with their questions. There are some rising stars in this year level and I am so excited to see what they will achieve in their final year of primary school and beyond. A big thank you to the school captains, Lucas, Ava, Hamish and Holly, for their warm welcome and for showing me their wonderful school. Once again, thank you to the principal, Simon Anderson, and the teachers, for having me. I cannot wait to visit your school again. I thank the House. Indi Electorate: Helico Australia 19 13:39 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi Indi is home to many hidden secrets, businesses that are innovative and exciting right on our doorstep. One of those hidden secrets is Helico Australia where, inside an old hay shed on the outskirts of Alexandra, you will find a team of 18 staff repairing and rebuilding helicopters from all over the country. Helico specialises in the deep maintenance and rebuilds of Robinson helicopters, small choppers that are used predominantly for agricultural work such as mustering. Run by locals Hylke and Neri Kijlstra, over the last seven years Helico has gone from strength to strength, growing the number of locals employed and training 12 apprentices. Each apprenticeship takes four years of study and work, highlighting their commitment to upskilling young people and growing the next generation of the aviation industry. Helico is also undertaking research and development, exploring ways to manufacture more parts for helicopters on site, rather than ordering them in from overseas. This is making the process of maintenance quicker and more cost efficient, with a better product at the end too. We need more employers like Hylke and Neri all over Australia, people who value their workers, their community and their industry and look at the bigger picture. I say to the jobs and skills minister, the industry minister and the transport minister: come to Indi and meet Hylke and Neri. (Time expired) Robertson Electorate: Community Batteries 19 13:40 Dr REID 300126 Robertson I rise to reaffirm the Albanese Labor government's commitment to establish a community battery in the Central Coast suburb of Narara. During the 2022 federal election, delivering a community battery was one of the commitments I made to the people of Robertson, and I'm pleased to say that this commitment is progressing well. I know through doorknocking and speaking with people in Narara and across the Central Coast that there is a high level of interest and excitement for our rollout of 400 community batteries. Stream 1 of this funding will go towards 58 community batteries overseen by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Narara will be one of these first 58 locations to receive a battery. Community batteries are a part of the Albanese Labor government's Powering Australia plan and aim to reduce pressure on our energy infrastructure. As Australia transitions to a renewable energy future, community batteries will play an integral part in supporting the energy system. They will help share solar energy across our community and across the Central Coast. They will help regulate the network and improve quality, and I look forward to this program continuing to power ahead. I encourage the people living in Narara and across the Central Coast to provide feedback on the proposed location for our community battery. I want to thank Minister Bowen, the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, for his leadership on this matter and this project. COVID 19: Vaccination 19 13:42 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash Deputy Speaker, I seek leave of the House to table two letters, one from Professor Ian Brighthope to the minister for health and the other from the department of health to Ms Elizabeth Hart. Leave not granted. Mr BROADBENT MT4 Professor Brighthope, who practised and taught medicine for 45 years, is scathing in his assessment of Australia's management of the COVID pandemic, saying the vaccine is killing and maiming too many Australians and that he is completely disgusted that prevention and early treatments had been deliberately cast aside by medical bureaucrats in 2020. Even Channel 7 ran a story last night with the headline 'COVID nightmare: the crippling side-effects'. If I were a doctor, in light of current litigation overseas, I'd be checking right now whether the government's 2021 assurance that doctors would not be liable was a hollow gesture because, unlike the vaccine manufacturers who are indemnified by our government, the letter to Elizabeth Hart states that no such indemnity scheme was established for medical professionals administering the COVID vaccines. I note the TGA is no longer interfering with doctors' rights to prescribe ivermectin off label, and that the AstraZeneca vaccine, which caused blood clots and was associated with unprecedented notifications to the TGA, has been quietly discontinued. I was especially pleased to hear two former colleagues, Peter Costello and John Anderson, speaking up last week that Australia had gone way too far during the pandemic. Deputy Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to address the House. Gender Diversity 19 13:44 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins Australia is a nation with a degree of social cohesion that is the envy of the world, a place we like to think that people can live their lives authentically. And yet, in amongst the colourful, interlaced fibres of our communities, there are forces that try to marginalise and divide us along gender identity lines. As a doctor I looked after people from all walks of life. People were treated without judgement within those hospital wards, which is why I find it perplexing to encounter anti-gender-diverse sentiment in our community. It is alien to me, but sadly far too common outside those hospital wards. Transgender people, including gender-diverse and non-binary people, are a marginalised group who are far more susceptible to mental health impacts and health disparities. Gender dysphoria is a complex health issue, requiring expert multidisciplinary care. With the introduction of our 10-year national action plan for the health and wellbeing of LGBTQI+ people, I want to assure the community that inclusion is core business for the Albanese government. We do this to ensure that everyone is able to live a healthy, productive life where they can be their true selves. Let us be champions of respect and dismantle the systemic and social barriers that encase our hearts and infect our community. Respect should be universal. Let it multiply. Parkes Electorate: News Media 20 13:45 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes I'd like to bring to the attention of the House the shocking decision by Southern Cross Austereo to remove the Spencer Gulf nightly news program. Obviously Spencer Gulf is in South Australia and the Parkes electorate is in New South Wales, but it was the only TV news that was going into Broken Hill. Broken Hill is the second-largest town in the Parkes electorate. It runs on central time. It's right on the South Australian border. Without any warning, the staff were notified with one day's notice that the programs would be ceased, the journalist in Broken Hill was laid off, and now Broken Hill has no nightly news program that's relevant to that community. Broken Hill is a community with a strong cultural past. It's the home of BHP. It has a strong background as the home, largely, of the union movement in New South Wales, and it is now having a resurgence with cobalt and magnetite. It's been discovered by tourists during the pandemic. We've got the Mundi Mundi Bash, where 16,000 people at a time come to the far west. This decision is so short sighted and shows so little respect to the people of far western New South Wales that they're outraged. It follows on from some of the decisions made by the corporate newspaper owners that have withdrawn their services from regional Australia, and we've been left swinging. Bennelong Electorate: Epping Bridge 20 13:47 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong If you live in Bennelong, I can almost guarantee that you've spent time stuck in traffic because of the Epping Bridge. It's one of Sydney's worst bottlenecks and more or less cuts our community in two. If you live to the west of the bridge, you only cross it if you have to. If you live to the east, you try and avoid it at all costs. That's why, before the last election, I made a commitment to upgrade the Epping Bridge. It's an upgrade that'll help ease traffic congestion and reduce travel times. After 12 years of unfulfilled promises by former governments, I'm proud to be part of a government that will deliver this much-needed upgrade. Importantly, we will deliver it alongside our new state colleagues in the Minns Labor government. I'm pleased to report that the contract to start design work for the widening of the bridge has been awarded. It will lead to a period of community consultation on the final design next year and construction after that. The upgrades will see the bridge widened in both directions, including the addition of wider footpaths for pedestrian safety. It'll have a new central median and safety screens along the bridge. I was elected to Bennelong to address the mess left by the former government, and I'm proud to be a part of a government that honours its promises and will deliver this much-needed upgrade to our community to get families home quicker and safer and provide active transport connections for the Epping town centre. Victoria: Roads 20 13:48 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland If you fix country roads, you will save country lives. There are too many people killed and injured on our regional road network, and Gippsland motorists right now are being robbed of life-saving road upgrades because state and federal government bureaucrats are failing to do their jobs. Now we have the minister threatening to take money away from our region. We're expected in Victoria to drive roadworthy cars, but the Premier, Dan Andrews, has failed to provide car-worthy roads. He doesn't even spend the money when it's provided by the federal government for life-saving road projects. The arterial road network owned by the state government is falling apart, and it's costing lives right across our state. To make it worse, we've had tens of millions of dollars in federal government funding from the previous federal government allocated to our region, but a failure to fast-track the design process has meant that roadworks often don't start until years after the commitment is actually made. Now we have Minister Catherine King threatening, in a review that she announced last week, to withdraw money from projects that haven't started, so in essence we have communities which are at risk of being punished by the federal Labor government because the state Labor government has failed to do its job and deliver the road safety projects that we've funded. Minister King needs to understand that saving lives through investment in better arterial roads and highways is a job for all levels of government. Our message to Minister King is that your review, underway right now, must quarantine road safety projects from any cuts, because if you fix country roads you will save country lives. Anzac Day 21 13:50 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Whilst forming up for the Anzac Day march in Palmerston in my electorate, I had a great chat with Joey Flynn. Joey was wearing her dad's medals. Jack Yates fought in the Second World War, and Joey gave me this poem that she'd written, 'An ode to the diggers of all wars': You gave your lives in thankless wars, your blood spilt upon foreign lands and shores. Your lives slipped away as you thought of loved ones far away in Aussie land. The bullets and bombs finding their target, exploding near and far, the fear, sweat and the stench of blood and death. Yet that Aussie spirit and determination kept you fighting through. Your digger mates all around you succumbed to injury or death, but you knew that you might never return home. Your injuries and deaths, you had never planned. As a daughter of a digger, I've grown up never knowing war. I do not know you, but I will not forget your courage and sacrifices. For all the fallen and wounded men, women and animals, may your spirits and minds with flashbacks no longer be troubled. We say we will remember them. Lest we forget. We hold you closely to our hearts always. Australians visiting and marching overseas and at home, we often think of you so that you will never be alone. Joey's mum was a member of the stolen generation, and she was proud to march on Anzac Day this year in Palmerston. Lest we forget. Mobile Black Spot Program 21 13:51 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks Round 6 of the Mobile Black Spot Program under this government is an absolute disgrace and an absolute rort. Let's recap what we know. We know that the minister admitted to Ben Fordham on Radio 2GB in April that she picked 54 out of 54 locations that got funding under this program. Not one was based on advice from the department—54 out of 54 were picked by the minister. We know that even though the Labor Party only holds a third of seats in regional Australia, guess what? Seventy-four per cent of the locations that the minister picked were in Labor electorates. Guess what else we know? In New South Wales and Victoria, of the 30 locations that she picked, 100 per cent were in Labor electorates. It's an absolute disgrace. I was in country Victoria recently and there are communities crying out for additional mobile services that face issues with mobile black spots and bushfires. This program must be done on the basis of need, not on the basis of the Labor Party's political benefits. The Auditor-General wrote to me last week in response to my request for an investigation into this program and said that he sees merit in a potential audit, and I certainly hope and look forward to that occurring because the program is a disgrace. Budget 21 13:53 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Our Treasurer has already said tonight's budget will deliver for the most vulnerable Australians. We've already seen some announcements before tonight that demonstrate that this budget will do that. One of the measures that I am particularly proud to see in our first big May budget is increasing the age that people can stay on parenting payment to until their youngest child turns 14. This decision will be welcomed by single parents, by women's organisations, by charity groups and by organisations supporting families who find themselves in this situation. It will be welcomed by them. Speaking to a dad in my electorate a few years ago, he had tragically lost his wife to cancer and he was making this tough decision whether to quit work to help raise his three boys. They were dealing with grief and then dealing with the prospect of how they would pay the bills now that they had lost their two income earners. What this measure does is actually give single parents the choice. In households where you have two parents, you do have choice. You decide whether two parents go to work, whether a parent stays home, and who's going to have the caring responsibilities. What this measure does is ensure that if a single parent decides to stay at home with their children and do all of the running around, they won't be doing it living in poverty. Stanton, Mr John 22 13:54 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper I'd like to acknowledge a member of my community who, at 91 years old, continues to prove that nothing beats good, old-fashioned grit, dedication and life experience. Campdrafting legend John Stanton has been taking out titles for over 70 years, having won his first campdraft competition in 1946. In 1954 he was selected to ride as a buckjumper on the previously completely unridden feature horse at the Royal Easter Show for Queen Elizabeth II, where he was offered 25 pounds by the show committee if he managed to stay on the horse. He conceded that he was 'probably selected because they didn't think they'd have to pay the money'. Well, they had to pay it in full. He was awarded the Warwick Gold Cup in 2017 for his lifelong contribution to the sport. At the time he was quoted as saying, 'While I can pull my boots on, I want to keep going. And, when the day comes that I can't get out of bed and pull my own boots on, I'll be prepared to hand my number plates in.' Recently at the local Macksville Show, just a couple of weeks ago, at 91, he took out the cut-out title, beating other competitors less than half his age. It looks like those old boots have got plenty of kick in them still, John. Many thanks to the organisers of the Macksville Show and all the competitors. Also, John, I'll see you next year. You're a legend. South Australia: Wine Industry 22 13:56 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby South Australia's wine industry is kicking goals. Our wines are world renowned and a major export industry for the state. Fifty per cent of all wines bottled in Australia come from South Australia and 80 per cent of all premium Australian wines come from South Australia. Boothby is a suburban seat but it's also home to the family owned Patritti wines. Founded in 1926, it produces a range of very nice wines—I recommend the rose—and their cellar door in Dover Gardens, with live music, is very much worth a visit. We have another wine industry secret in Boothby: the Australian Wine Research Institute at the Waite Campus of the University of Adelaide. I recently toured this facility and saw students at work learning how to make wine and the research labs where scientists isolate the compounds that produce specific flavours and analyse the impact of smoke taint. But the most interesting part of their work is the development of the NOLO industry: no-alcohol and low-alcohol wines. They are working to make these products' taste and texture indistinguishable from good quality wine—not like water plus additives. I have no doubt they'll get there and will open up yet another great export industry for Australia. We know that the demand, both across Australia and overseas, for no-alcohol and low-alcohol wine is just growing. Many thanks to Managing Director Mark Krstic. Cost of Living 22 13:57 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield There's nothing this Labor government likes doing more than congratulating itself. But all of tonight's hugs and backslapping can't disguise the reality that this Prime Minister and his government are failing to get on top of this worsening cost-of-living crisis. The price of everything continues to go up. Gas and household fuels are up 14.3 per cent. Tertiary education is up over 14 per cent. Domestic travel costs are up 4.7 per cent. The cost of essentials like fruit and vegetables is rising to the point that more Australians are turning to cheaper, canned alternatives. Lifeline says up to 80 per cent of its calls relate to cost-of-living pressures. Forty-five per cent of Australians say they're delaying essential repairs and servicing of their cars. More than three-quarters of Australians say they are extremely, or very, concerned about the cost of living. The National Youth Mental Health Survey notes the cost of living as 'the single biggest concern for young Australians'. Before the last election, the Prime Minister promised that Australians would be better off, with cheaper mortgages and $275 off their power bills. Instead, millions of Australians are struggling to make ends meet. Inflation is a cruel force which hurts us all. A big-spending budget which fuels inflation is the last thing Australians need right now. Budget 22 13:59 Ms ROBERTS 157125 Pearce I rise in anticipation of what will be a considered budget that goes to the heart of the way we govern for all Australians. I know that families in my electorate of Pearce in Western Australia will wholeheartedly welcome the many measures that will provide cost-of-living relief. We have committed a $2.2 billion package to strengthening Medicare and measures to make health care more accessible and affordable. We are making medicines cheaper and easier to access, a welcome move for all Australians who rely on medications. We are making it easier for Australians to see a doctor when they need to by improving after-hours access to primary care. We have committed $11.3 billion over four years to fund the outcome of the Fair Work Commission's record 15 per cent pay rise for 250,000 aged-care workers across the country from 1 July 2023. We're extending the financial safety net for thousands of single parents. This is a sensible and considered budget that will provide many measures that will help cost-of-living relief. The Albanese Labor government has listened. The Albanese Labor government understands. The Albanese Labor government is clearly taking action, and we look forward to tonight's budget. The SPEAKER 53517 It being 2 pm, in accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION 23 PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION Members Sworn 23 14:01 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a return to the writ which I issued on 27 February 2023 for the election of a member to serve for the electoral division of Aston, in the state of Victoria, to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of the Hon. Alan Edward Tudge. By the endorsement on the writ, it is certified that Mary Judith Jacinta Doyle has been elected. Mary Judith Jacinta Doyle made and subscribed the affirmation of allegiance. 14:04 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler on indulgence—Last month Mary Doyle made history, and today Mary Doyle made history as the member for Aston, being the first person to swear allegiance to King Charles. I do note that some in the media perhaps haven't noticed that that's what we do as members of the House of Representatives and of the Senate and as ministers, because that seemed to be controversial while I was in London—something that should not have been. Today the member for Aston joins us in the work of building a better future. It is the first time a government candidate has won a seat from the opposition in over 100 years. She is already the best member for Aston in over 30 years! And she is the newest member of a government working today, and every day, to deliver the positive plan that Australians voted for in 2022. When I rang Mary and asked her to be the candidate in the by-election, she had, of course, already contested an election back in 2022 and achieved an outstanding result, standing for an electorate that had received 54.7 per cent of the primary vote for the former member for Aston, Alan Tudge, and a two-party preferred vote of over 60 per cent for the coalition. Mary achieved an outstanding result in 2022, and we were hopeful that we could maintain that result. She went much better than expectations could possibly have planned for, and she did that because of who she is. Mary is someone who grew up in public housing, a mum and carer to three beautiful children, a mortgage holder who knows the pressure that's there on family budgets, a working parent who has seen the punishing cost of child care, a cancer survivor who knows the true meaning of Medicare, and a proud citizen of the outer eastern suburbs of Melbourne who cares about her community and cares about the local environment. And Mary Doyle is a person driven by the oldest and deepest Australian aspiration—the aspiration for a better life and a greater opportunity for the next generation. I say to the member for Aston: I am very confident that you will continue to be a strong voice for your local community. And I am delighted that you are joining us here on budget day, with the great privilege of serving the people of Australia that all of us have from our different perspectives. I've got to know you personally and seen you grow, particularly in that period under the pressure that comes with being a by-election candidate, where the focus of the media on Aston was far greater, it's fair to say, than it probably was in the 2022 election. I saw you grow as a person, and the Australian people, but particularly the people of Aston, saw the character that you showed. For those people who were watching on election night, when you were introduced by the Deputy Prime Minister as the successful candidate, I think your humility showed, your character showed and your passionate commitment for that local community showed. And I am certain that you will bring that diligence, that commitment and that perseverance to representing the good people of Aston in this parliament and beyond. You are someone who has created history; that can't be taken away from you. But I look forward to the future history that you're going to create over many years as the member for Aston. I congratulate you on behalf of the government, very sincerely, on being sworn in today as the member for Aston. MINISTRY 23 MINISTRY Temporary Arrangements 23 14:09 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I inform the House that the member for Rankin is absent from question time today. I will answer questions on his behalf. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 24 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Cost of Living 24 14:09 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson No-one's got a problem with that, Mr Speaker! My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister promised Australians cheaper mortgages, but since his election interest rates have gone up 10 times—the fastest rise in history. The Prime Minister promised a $275 cut to your power bill each year, before the election, but Labor's intervention in the gas market is causing prices to skyrocket. The Prime Minister promised families would be better off, but the cost-of-living crisis has never been worse. Why do Australians always pay more under Labor? 14:10 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for his question. We did promise and we are delivering on making a difference to people. We are making a difference with the cheaper medicines policy that we brought in on 1 January. We are making an enormous difference, contrasting with the person who asked the question, who, when he was health minister, wanted to jack up the price of essential medicines by $5 per script. There's a contrast. Cheaper child care starts from 1 July. When the legislation was carried, the shadow finance minister said this: 'It's certainly not the policy that we would have introduced.' Never a truer word was said! On 1 July we're extending paid parental leave to six months. The Leader of the Opposition was a senior minister in the former government, which repeatedly tried to cut government funded paid parental leave for tens of thousands of families. We said we'd get wages moving again. But those opposite voted against the secure jobs, better pay legislation. When we said that the minimum wage should be increased by just $1 an hour, they said it would wreck the economy and it was reckless. We talked about the Energy Price Relief Plan. In the question, which, of course, is complete— Mr Ted O'Brien 138932 You said $275— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fairfax will cease interjecting. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order, members on my left and right! Mr ALBANESE R36 It is complete nonsense that somehow the cap on gas and coal that we introduced in conjunction with state and territory governments, Labor and coalition, wasn't working. That's not what the Australian Energy Market Operator said on 28 April. They said: … wholesale spot prices averaged $83 per megawatt hour (MWh) for the March quarter, down from $93/MWh and $216/MWh in the previous December and September quarters. Our plan is working there. Similarly, the regulator, Clare Savage, said this on 20 April: Our latest quarterly wholesale report— for January to March— shows forward base futures prices for electricity initially stabilised during the early part of 2023, and … remain well below levels observed in 2022. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fairfax will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 They've got nothing but negativity over there. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Deakin will cease interjecting. The SPEAKER 53517 So will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Budget 24 14:13 Ms DOYLE 299962 Aston My question is to the Prime Minister. How is the Albanese government cleaning up the mess of the last decade and laying a stronger foundation for a better future? 14:13 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Aston for her question. This is the first question I've ever got from a member for Aston; the previous member was mute for the entire term! Tonight's budget will be a responsible budget. Stronger foundations for a better future—that is what we will be providing tonight, cleaning up the mess that we inherited. Gross debt was predicted in the previous government's budget, and I remind them that we've been in office for less than one year. In 2022, their budget predicted that, this year, gross debt would be $977 billion, almost $1 trillion. They projected a deficit of 3.4 per cent of GDP, or $77.9 billion, for this year. I'll make a bold prediction—without stealing the Treasurer's thunder tonight—that it'll be a bit better than that. I'll make that bold prediction. They had $7½ billion of unfunded and terminating measures over the forward estimates. That is what we were left with—a booby trapped budget that didn't plan for the future. This time last year, those opposite handed down a budget without a single dollar in savings—not one. But they had a whole lot of expenditure out there, most of which just disappeared as soon as people cast their votes. Their focus was just on the election. Our focus is on the needs of the Australian people: making sure that we look after the vulnerable and those doing it tough, making sure that we strengthen Medicare, and making sure that we deal with the skills crisis that we inherited. Tonight's budget will be about helping people who are struggling to make ends meet, while not adding to inflation. It will be about dealing with the immediate challenges but investing in the medium and long term as well. It will be about providing affordable, effective and targeted cost-of-living relief, delivering historic investments in Medicare and health, supporting vulnerable Australians, growing the economy and strengthening the budget to make our finances more secure for the future. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting immediately so I can hear from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. Budget 25 14:16 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Prime Minister. Core inflation in Australia is higher than in countries like the US, the UK and Canada, and Australians are hurting. Can the Prime Minister, using his economics degree, explain why his government's— Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right! The Minister for Home Affairs will cease interjecting. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right, I ask you to be silent immediately so I can hear the deputy leader. Out of respect for the deputy leader, she will start her question again. Ms LEY 00AMN My question is to the Prime Minister. Core inflation in Australia is higher than in countries like the US, the UK and Canada, and Australians are hurting. Can the Prime Minister, using his economics degree, explain why his government's only answer has been to announce a series of budget measures to spend more and tax more? Why do Australian families always pay more under Labor? 14:17 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I do have an economics degree, thank you, Deputy Leader of the Opposition. I encourage her to remind people at every opportunity. In case she's wondering, it was from the University of Sydney. I can bring it in here, and perhaps she can table it and frame it and put it up in her office. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Deakin will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 Indeed, I do use it each and every day. I use it to know that, indeed, inflation had taken off well before Labor took office. Indeed, the largest quarterly rise this century was—guess when? March 2022. The largest rise in inflation of any quarter this century was on their watch—the last quarter in which they were in office. That is the starting point that my government inherited: a 2.1 per cent jump in one quarter. If you do a bit of maths—you don't need an economics degree—2.1 over a quarter times four equals a pretty high inflation rate. That is what they were dealing with, and that is what we have had to deal with. After the election, it emerged that the Morrison government had ignored Treasury warnings, and it used its final budget to unleash a desperate vote-buying spending spree. They added fuel to the inflation fire. A former government source described it as 'ordering the entree, the main and the dessert'. It was all there. All the one-off payments and the cash payments were there—not worrying about the impact. Indeed, Australians always pay more under the coalition. We know that the highest-taxing government was the Howard government and the second-highest-taxing government was that of Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison. The budget papers accompanying their final budget last year showed no surpluses over the forwards; instead, the coalition were on track to rack up $224 billion in additional borrowings over just four years. The Intergenerational report showed the budget would not be in surplus in any year between now and 2060. That was their legacy. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Members on my left and right will cease interjecting. The House will come to order so I can hear from the member for Blair. Defence 26 14:20 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister: how is the Albanese Labor government cleaning up the mess of a wasted decade under the Liberals and Nationals when it comes to defence? 14:20 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio I thank the member for his question and acknowledge his contribution to Australian defence policy. On 31 March 2021, a day after the Leader of the Opposition had just become Australia's defence minister, he announced that the former government was to establish an industrial base in this country for the manufacture of guided weapons. This was done in the finest traditions and with all the hoopla of a Morrison government announcement. Indeed, the member for Cook was on the press release, where he said: As the COVID-19 pandemic has shown, having the ability for self-reliance, be it vaccine development or the defence of Australia, is vital to meeting our own requirements in a changing global environment. We all know what they didn't do with vaccines, and they weren't much better when it came to the defence of Australia. The press release also said: The Australian Strategic Policy Institute has estimated that Australia will spend $100 billion in the next 20 years on missile and guided weapons purchases. It promised the creation of 2,000 high-tech jobs in Australia—although, under the scrutiny of Senate estimates, it turns out that that number was not based on any advice from the Department of Defence; in fact, it was completely made up. The reality of that announcement was very different. Only $1 billion was committed, not nearly enough to see this get going, and the time frame for the beginning of manufacturing guided weapons in this country was not to happen until 2027, a full six years after this announcement was made—promises on the never-never, all fanfare, no follow-up, all announcement, no delivery. On his first full day in the job as Australia's defence minister he sold this country a fantasy. The Albanese government is very different. Announcements are one matter, but we ask to be judged on our outcomes. Over the last couple of weeks we've committed $2.5 billion to the establishment of a guided weapons enterprise in this country. We've already appointed a three-star officer, Air Vice-Marshal Leon Phillips, to oversee that enterprise, and this is all part of the Defence Strategic Review, which was released on 24 April, the first retasking of our Defence Force in more than 35 years. At the heart of that retasking is giving our Defence Force the capacity for impactful protection, which is why establishing a guided weapons enterprise forms one of our six initial priorities to the Defence Strategic Review, because this is exactly the capability our nation needs to keep Australians safe. Climate Change 26 14:23 Dr RYAN 297660 Kooyong My question is for the Prime Minister. During the last election campaign you identified climate change as the greatest threat to our national security. In May 2022 your government committed to an urgent climate risk assessment by the Office of National Intelligence to help us understand the security risk of climate change. You've now had that report since November. Why hasn't it been released, and when will we see it? 14:24 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for her question. This government has brought a heightened degree of transparency, when it comes to climate change, to this parliament and to this country. One of the most important things we've done is enshrined in law, in the Climate Change Act, that the climate change minister must report annually to parliament on progress against targets and on all other matters relating to climate change and to policies. That is something we're proud to have done. I've delivered the first climate change statement and will deliver the second later this year. This is a very important addition to transparency. In relation to national security, we do say that climate change is a very real and significant issue in our national security. That's why the Prime Minister appointed me to the National Security Committee of Cabinet, for example—to make sure that that is represented around the national security table. In relation to the national security statement, of course, matters that are classified in relation to advice to the Prime Minister and the National Security Committee are treated accordingly. But we have brought that level of transparency, and I'm happy to provide further updates to the House accordingly. Aged Care 26 14:25 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham My question is to the Minister for Aged Care. How is the Albanese Labor government improving the lives of workers in the aged-care sector? 14:25 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley I thank the member for Cunningham for her question. I know she cares very deeply about this and is very deeply engaged in lifting the standard of aged care in this country, and I thank her for continuing to work shoulder to shoulder with me on that. The Albanese government is proud to be delivering the largest ever pay rise for aged-care workers in history. After nine years of workforce neglect from those opposite, Labor has made a record investment in our workforce. Our commitment helps more than 250,000 workers across this country, and it means that nurses can earn an extra $10,000 a year. It means that personal-care workers can earn an extra $7,000 a year. That is what valuing workers looks like. That is what care looks like. That is what doing something meaningful to address workforce shortages actually looks like. I have visited 30 aged-care homes in the 11 months that I have been the minister, and the no. 1 issue raised with me is staff shortages. We said that we would address the mess left behind by those opposite, and now our budget commits $11.3 billion to addressing their workforce crisis. But this wage rise impacts more than just our tireless and skilled workers. It improves the lives of those who receive aged care as well. They are just as thrilled for their workers as we are. On the weekend I met home-care recipient Rachel, 91 years young, while doorknocking in my electorate of Lilley. Rachel uses a home-care package, and she had her nurse, Elle, from Burnie Brae over when they watched the Treasurer and I make the announcement on TV last Thursday morning. Rachel said Elle actually shouted out loud, and you could hear her from Bribie Island, because Elle has three kids, and this announcement, that she was getting an extra $200 a week, meant she could buy her kids new shoes for sport. That is what this announcement does. Workers like Elle and care recipients like Rachel are why we committed to this record spend. This spend is more than 10 times what those opposite committed to in their workforce pillar to address the workforce crisis—a pillar that could not even improve or commit to improving pay-packet structure. In fact, those opposite still refuse to back this funding of a wage rise, even now. Mr Fletcher L6B Mr Speaker, a point of order on relevance: the question was 'how is the government improving the lives of workers?' There was no reference to the previous government, and the minister has repeatedly referred to the record of the previous government. The SPEAKER 53517 With 16 seconds to go, I'm going to draw the minister back to her question and ask her to conclude without referring to the matter raised. Ms WELLS 264121 With respect to improving the lives of the workforce, those opposite on Sunday couldn't even commit to doing it, even now. They would not commit to doing it. They refused to commit to doing it now. I think they should answer to the 250,000 people whose lives stand to be impacted why they won't, even now, commit to improving the workforce. (Time expired) Cost of Living 27 14:29 Mr WALLACE 265967 Fisher My question is to the Prime Minister. The cost-of-living crisis under this government is crippling Australian families. David, from Meridan Plains in my electorate of Fisher, contacted me recently to say that he and wife are trying to support their family of five by working five jobs between them, working seven days a week. Prime Minister, why do Australian families always pay more under Labor? 14:30 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for his question, and I send my regards, through him, to David, his constituent, and his partner. Many Australians do work damn hard in this country—they work damn hard and they do it tough to put food on the table for their families and to aspire to a better life for their kids. One of the things that you can do, of course, to improve people's situation, is to get wages moving again. It's one of the things that we have been determined to do. And that was recognised by the RBA governor when he said that, 'wages growth is stronger than it was a few years ago, which is a welcome development'. He was very appreciative. I note that the member for Lilley, the Minister for Aged Care, just gave an answer speaking about people in the aged-care sector. Now, during the pandemic we spoke about people who were the heroes of the pandemic, looking after our older, vulnerable Australians during that very difficult time—not thinking of themselves, but thinking of others. During the pandemic, one of the things that we said we would do was to not just give them our thanks, but we said that they deserved a wage rise, to be better off. When the member for Lilley was giving that response, about the more than $11 billion that will be in tonight's budget for people in the aged-care sector—people who are doing it tough—those opposite just interjected throughout her answer— Opposition members interjecting— Mr ALBANESE R36 as they continue to do now. When we talk about people who are doing it tough, I can't think of any group who are more deserving in our society than aged-care workers: the cleaners, the carers, the orderlies, the nurses—all of those people who are doing it incredibly tough. But increasing wages makes a difference. Mike Baird, a former New South Wales premier—who was probably opposed by those opposite, like they opposed other New South Wales Liberal premiers on everything they've done with this government previously—said this: 'We are incredibly appreciative that the federal government has committed to the increase awarded by the Fair Work Commission and delivered on it. It is truly welcome.' He, of course, was the chief executive of HammondCare. He said this: 'Anyone that has had someone in aged care knows the impact that our aged-care workers have. Each day and night they change lives.' We support a wage increase for them. Those opposite are silent on them. (Time expired) Commonwealth Procurement 28 14:33 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean My question is to the Minister for Government Services. What did the recent hearing of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit uncover about procurement and contracting in the government services portfolio? The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition cannot continue to give commentary when ministers are approaching the dispatch box. I call the minister. 14:33 Mr SHORTEN 00ATG Maribyrnong On 24 November last year, the Age and the Sydney Morning Herald disturbingly reported that de facto Canberra lobbying firm Synergy 360 received secret advice from the member for Fadden. I ordered a review into the contracts which may have been tainted. As has been made clear by agency task force representatives and the reviewer, Dr Watt, the review was limited to only looking into the conduct of public servants and not that of vendors, former ministers, MPs and their officers. On 14 April this year, the JCPAA, chaired by the member for Bruce, held public hearings into the findings of the Watt review. The member for Fadden's former business partner, political fundraiser and part-owner of Synergy 360, Mr John Margerison, gave evidence. The chair's first question to Mr Margerison was: 'What's APUT?' Mr Margerison was asked by the chair what APUT was. He replied—and I quote from the transcript: It's the Australian Property Trust. It's a unit trust. The chair then read aloud an email Mr Margerison sent to his Gold Coast accountant, Mr Sean Beasley, about directing who was to receive the profits from Synergy 360. The transcript reads: On 13 September 2017, you emailed your accountant, Mr Beasley, and advised him: 'FYI, anything that comes in from this in the future, I will end up sending to APUT— the Property Trust— the same amount that comes in.' Mr Margerison went on to say that the trust that he controlled was, according to his instruction to his accountant, to direct profits from the consulting company derived from Commonwealth contracts. This property trust had as one of its beneficiaries the member for Fadden. I quote the transcript where Mr Margerison explains the member for Fadden's pecuniary interest in the Property Trust receiving profits from Commonwealth contracts. It reads: I had a business relationship with Mr Robert at one point in time. That finished around about, give or take, the end of 2018. He would have been a unit holder through whatever mechanism, whether it be his family trust or personally … up until … that time, give or take. Money derived from Commonwealth contracts was being funnelled through to a member of parliament. The evidence presented to the committee is crystal clear. We know that in a few weeks the member for Fadden is leaving the Australian parliament. The evidence is crystal clear. The question for the member for Fadden and the Leader of the Opposition is: did the member ever, directly or indirectly, seek to or receive a financial benefit from Synergy 360 and is there still a potential benefit owed to him? A further question for the Leader of the Opposition is: do you endorse the conduct of the member for Fadden in light of the evidence that we've heard? Economy 28 14:36 Ms McKENZIE 124514 Flinders My question is to the Prime Minister. A family with a $750,000 mortgage is now paying $1,723 more every month compared to May 2022 because this government hasn't taken any action to reduce inflation. Why do Australian families always pay more under Labor? 14:37 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Flinders for her question. When it comes to pressure on inflation one of the things that a government can do is make sure that when it hands down a budget it is fiscally responsible. Tonight you'll see the response of the government that I'm proud to lead. To be fair to the member for Flinders, she wasn't here to see, quite frankly, the debacle that occurred towards the end of the long office of the Morrison, Abbott and Turnbull governments where we saw the law of diminishing returns—to use an economic term for the benefit of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. We saw that in place—absolutely. Today the cash rate is 3.85 per cent. When this bloke was the Assistant Treasurer it was 6.75 per cent. What's larger—6.75 or 3.85? You don't need an economics degree to work that out. I'll tell you what my government is doing on inflation. Those opposite of course poured fuel on the inflation fire in last year's budget. I remind the member for Flinders that inflation's highest jump this century was in the last quarter of March 2022. I say to the member for Flinders—I'll give the member for Flinders some unsolicited advice—just say: 'I wasn't here. It wasn't my fault that it all went wrong.' The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fairfax will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 Since then it has got better because when this government had revenue bonuses come in last year we saved 99 per cent and we put it towards the bottom line. Those opposite, under the government of the law of diminishing returns—the Abbott, Turnbull, Morrison government—saved 40 per cent which, to be fair, was more than the Howard government ever did. And you'll see tonight, again, what a responsible government looks like. The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition is continuing to interject during question time. If this continues she will be warned. Budget: Parenting Payment 29 14:40 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How will the Albanese Labor government's changes to parenting payment single deliver targeted cost-of-living relief? 14:40 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I'd like to thank the member for Fraser for that question and for his fierce advocacy for families in his electorate. I'd like to thank many of my Labor colleagues and, indeed, many on the crossbench as well, for their advocacy on boosting support for single parents. Yesterday the Prime Minister announced that this government will expand the eligibility for the single-parent payment by increasing the age cut-off from when the youngest child turns eight to when the youngest child turns 14. This will provide 57,000 low-income single parents with an additional $176.90 per fortnight. This measure will strengthen Australia's safety net and, as the Prime Minister yesterday, is an investment in families. It recognises that many single parents—overwhelmingly women—have a lot to juggle. The juggle doesn't change when the child turns eight. Our change means that parents will continue to receive a higher payment during the later primary school years and through the critical transition to high school. As children get older the demands on parenting don't go away but they do evolve. Single parents are in a much stronger position to take on more paid work as their children get older, but they do need support to get there. I'd like to acknowledge the work by Terese Edwards of the Council of Single Mothers and Sam Mostyn AO of the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce, who put significant work into their report and who also welcomed yesterday's announcement. They said the reform will allow those who qualify for the payment to be better parents and to unlock their untapped economic potential. Both of these women have been consistent and constructive in their advocacy on particular challenges facing single parents, most of whom are women. I'm pleased that our changes have been warmly welcomed by many advocates and stakeholders, including The Parenthood and the Australian Council of Social Service, who have both called this measure life-changing. The Australian Council of Social Service said that 'restoration of the parenting payment was a key recommendation of the Women's Economic Equality Taskforce' and that the government's changes were 'incredibly welcome'. The Parenthood also said that this change, along with the abolition of the ParentsNext program, 'will greatly help thousands of vulnerable children and parents, most mothers, and allow them to have greater financial freedom and flexibility'. Our change will ensure single parents have the safety net they need. Our government is focused on families dealing with the day-to-day financial pressures, while creating more economic security for them over the long-term. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Page will be silent so I can hear from the Leader of the Nationals. Environment 29 14:43 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. Can the minister advise how many hectares of remnant vegetation will be cleared for the 106 renewable projects that have received or are awaiting your ministerial approval? 14:44 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney I thank the Leader of the Nationals for that question because it allows me to talk about how I am so proud of the fact that we are approving renewable energy projects at twice the rate of those opposite, because we are committed on this side to a net zero future for Australia. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Members on my left will cease interjecting. The Leader of the Nationals has asked a question. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Of course, land clearing is an issue that both state and territory and Commonwealth governments need to address. I'll tell you what: you don't avoid land clearing by building the coalmines that those opposite say we should be replacing renewable energy projects with. You'd rather not build renewable energy. I'm proud of the fact that I am part of a government that has legislated a pathway to net zero. Those opposite had 22 separate energy policies, and they didn't land one of them. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will take a break. I will hear from the Leader of the Nationals. Mr Littleproud 265585 I raise a point of order on relevance. It's a very, very specific question around the number of remnant hectares that will be cleared for renewable projects. It is very specific. We've endured a third of her time— The SPEAKER 53517 You may resume your seat. Yes, the question did require a number. It was about renewable energy. I want to deal with this issue. Standing order 104 simply says the minister 'must be relevant'. She's talking about renewable energy. Yes, I know you've asked a specific question, but under the standing orders she's answering the question directly. If you'd like to change the standing orders, go right ahead, but at the moment that is what you're dealing with, on page 53 of standing orders. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M I'm proud of the fact that we want to support upgrading transmission lines across the east coast grid. We've got $20 billion to invest in that so that we can take the 82 per cent renewable energy that we are committed to achieving in 82 months—great work—get that into the transmission lines, get it into people's homes, get it into people's businesses, bring down their energy bills and bring down pollution in this country as well. We've got a commitment to bring down emissions when it comes to electric vehicles as well. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Leader of the Nationals will cease interjecting or will be warned. Ms PLIBERSEK 83M It's really interesting that those opposite don't want to hear about our plans for renewable energy, our plans to upgrade transmission lines and our plans to bring down emissions, because they had 22 energy policies and didn't land a single one. He's embarrassed by the fact that they never landed a single one. You know what? I've got 101 renewable energy projects before me right now, and I am delighted by the fact that we've got more renewable energy projects coming in all the time, because renewable energy is good for the environment. It's good for Australian households. It's good for Australian businesses. Dealing with climate change is one of the best things that we can do for the Australian environment. The idea that those opposite are against land clearing, given their record on grasslands—Jam Land, the land clearing that those opposite supported— (Time expired) Trade With The United Kingdom 30 14:48 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons My question is to the Prime Minister. When will Australia's free trade agreement with the United Kingdom come into force, and how will it benefit Australia's businesses, Australia's consumers and the Australian economy overall? 14:48 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Lyons for his question. Indeed, in the United Kingdom, along with Prime Minister Sunak, last week I announced that the free trade agreement would come into force on 31 May. That follows the final parliamentary processes being completed in the UK just last week and our processes being completed before parliament rose at the end of last year. This FTA opens up new opportunities and delivers significant benefits for Australian businesses and consumers, for Australian farmers and for Australian workers and travellers. It will lift our entire economy. It will eliminate tariffs on nearly all exports to the United Kingdom, making an enormous difference. I was at the Bondi Green cafe there in London, one of 14 as part of a business that's been established over the last decade, providing the best food, produce and wine that Australia can produce to UK customers. That is a good thing. What it will do is enable the price of those to be decreased substantially, but it will also make it easier for Australians to work in the UK, raising the working holiday visa age from 30 to 35 and increasing the maximum stay from two years to three years. It will eliminate tariffs on imports from the UK. This will reduce costs to households and businesses and will, therefore, have a deflationary impact on our economy. Together with the historic AUKUS partnership, we're strengthening our relationship with a longstanding partner and friend. I had the privilege of going with the Defence secretary of state up to Barrow to look at their manufacturing of submarines that occurs there, and that is where I met Australian workers who are already being trained there. The relationships we are building with countries around the world are vital to Australia's strategic interests and to a thriving economy at home. In addition, I met with leaders of the European Union, on the sidelines of the coronation, to see in what way we could advance the Australia-EU free trade agreement. A lot of work is going into that because that has significant potential benefits for Australia into the future. Consulting Firms 31 14:51 Ms DANIEL 008CH Goldstein My question is to the Prime Minister. The government has been warned that consulting firms are tailoring advice to earn more money instead of giving frank and fearless advice for the nation. What is your plan to address the innate conflicts of interest between government and big consulting to shut down this obscene use of billions in taxpayers' money and to enable public servants to be frank and fearless? 14:51 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Goldstein for her question. One of the things that we have done, as a government, is to reduce what we regarded as an overreliance on consultants. We have made sure—and you'll see in tonight's budget the contrast which is there—that we have put on additional public servants to deal with the challenges that we had with the backlog in visas of one million people, to make sure that we deal with issues in government services, which would have dropped off the shelf if we hadn't extended funding to services like myGov beyond 30 June, which were due to end. We've made sure, as will be reflected tonight as well, that we have indicated to the Public Service, by every single one of my ministers not just talking to the secretary of their departments but talking to their whole departments, encouraging ideas to come up, encouraging that frank and fearless advice to come to government so that, as we go forward, we maximise the respect and the capacity of the Public Service. I do that personally as well. On any occasion when I visited the UK, we had a meeting with the High Commissioner for all of the staff at the High Commission—the staff who work in Defence, the staff who work in Home Affairs, the staff who work in Immigration, the staff who work in Trade and the staff who work in Foreign Affairs and diplomatic advice as well. It is, to me, common courtesy; if you treat people with respect, you will get better outcomes. We also have the same approach towards their income and treating them with respect when it comes to proper negotiations between the government and public servants, through their union, to make sure that respect is shown. The former government did receive some advice about the issue that has come to light when it comes to the Tax Practitioners Board. Indeed, the measures that were there from a review into the Tax Practitioners Board were given to the government of the day in 2019. But, like so much else, nothing happened. My government is committed to implementing the recommendations of that review. Cost of Living 31 14:54 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How will the Albanese Labor government help households with the cost of living through energy bill relief? Have there been any barriers in developing this response? 14:55 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon I thank the honourable member for her question and her leadership on matters of climate and energy. Of course, as the House knows, last year, faced with heightened pressure on energy prices right around the world, we acted. Mr Ted O'Brien 138932 You promised $275! The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fairfax will cease interjecting or be warned. Mr BOWEN DZS We acted by capping the price of coal and gas. That was controversial then and it's controversial now. The Leader of the Opposition today, just in question time earlier, claimed that capping the price of gas had forced prices up. Maybe the Leader of the Opposition should have gone to the University of Sydney to get an economics degree! Maybe we'd all be better off if that had happened, because he thinks that lower coal and gas prices lead to higher energy prices. But we've done that and it's had an impact. We've seen that impact in the draft Default Market Offer released earlier this year: 29 percentage points lower than it otherwise would have been. As Clare Savage, the Energy Regulator, has made clear, that is in large part due to the impact of the intervention by the Albanese government. That has saved up to $1,676 for a Victorian small business each year. It's saved up to $530 for a household, particularly South Australian households. Of course, we know we need to do more and tonight we will be doing more. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Fairfax will withdraw that comment. Mr Ted O'Brien 138932 I withdraw. Mr BOWEN DZS The same legislation which enabled that intervention to cap the price of coal and gas enables direct rebates to Australian families and businesses—carefully designed to put downward pressure on inflation by reducing power prices directly, compared to what they would have been. I'm pleased to confirm that 5½ million households and a million businesses will benefit from that action. The Treasurer will, of course, outline more action this evening. But there's a third element as well. We understand, on this side of the House, that reducing emissions and reducing bills are the same thing. We understand that if you make a house or a business more efficient, you reduce bills as well as emissions, and we happen to think that's a good thing. Call us old fashioned but on this side of the House we think that reducing bills and reducing emissions is a good thing. We know that Australia ranks 58th out of 63 on energy efficiency of households. We can do better. In particular, lower- and middle-income household need that support. So, again, we will see tonight strong action to help households reduce their bills and emissions, particularly for those who need assistance and particularly for small business. We've already announced our tax treatment of energy efficient investments by small business which will benefit hundreds of thousands of small businesses across the country who want to reduce their emissions and reduce their bills, and we're going to help them do it. Cost of Living 32 14:58 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay My question is to the Prime Minister. Under the Prime Minister's cost-of-living crisis, the cost of gas and household fuels is up 14.3 per cent. Tertiary education costs are up 9.7 per cent. Domestic travel costs are up 4.7 per cent. Lifeline says 80 per cent of calls relate to the cost of living. Forty-five per cent of Australians say they are delaying getting their car serviced. The National Youth Mental Health Survey reports cost of living as the biggest concern for young Australians. Why do Australian families always pay more under Labor? 14:59 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Thank you for that very tight question, Member for Lindsay! I enjoyed going to Lindsay during the state election campaign. Mrs McIntosh 281513 You didn't tell me you were coming. Mr ALBANESE R36 Indeed, I was there at Penrith. You could've followed the crowd following the new member for Penrith. The new member for Penrith, Karen McKeown, was followed out there. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Members on my right, the member for Lindsay is entitled to raise a point of order. Mrs McIntosh 281513 The point of order is on relevance. It's Karen McKeown. The SPEAKER 53517 That is not a point of order, but thank you for your assistance. The Prime Minister will return to the question. Mr ALBANESE R36 I note the member for Penrith is there in the parliament on her first sitting day today, as the first day of the Minns Labor government, and I congratulate all the members who've been elected there. At that press conference the member for Penrith was kind enough to remind me that she was a recruit of the Labor Party many years ago. I'm asked about the cost of living and about inflation costs, and I remind the member for Lindsay that the March 2022 quarter—you mightn't want to hear it—had the highest inflation of any quarter this century. It was on their watch, and the member for Lindsay doesn't have the same excuse as the member for Flinders, because she was here when that was happening. Those opposite will see tonight a plan to assist vulnerable Australians: as the member for Kingston has just outlined, the plan to help single parents, to make a substantial difference to them; the plans as well that we have to help small business—I note that the Canterbury Bankstown Chamber of Commerce are here in the gallery today, including John Khoury, the chairman of the Bulldogs. Welcome, and I thank the National Rugby League for their endorsement of constitutional recognition for Aboriginal Australians that they, along with other groups in civil society, have announced today. But we will have support for small business. We will have support for families. We'll have support for those who need health care. We'll have support to lift wages in the aged-care sector. We'll have further support confirmed for child care that comes in on 1 July. We will have a budget that provides support for people who need it whilst not putting pressure on inflation—unlike those opposite, who didn't provide any support for people, except for their mates, and put increased pressure on inflation. That's the contrast. That's why this group here have been elected on good economic management, and that's what we're delivering. (Time expired) Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 32 15:02 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm My question is to the minister for health: how is the Albanese Labor government making medicines cheaper for millions of Australians, what advice has informed the government's policy and who will benefit? 15:03 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I thank the member for Chisholm for her question. I know how hard she campaigned in the eastern suburbs of Melbourne on our promise to make medicines cheaper, and our government are delivering on that promise. Just last July we slashed the maximum amount that pensioners and concession card holders would pay for their medicines across a given year by 25 per cent, and in September we cut the price of 2,000 brands of medicine, putting $130 million back into the pockets of hardworking Australians. As everyone in this House knows, on 1 January we delivered the biggest cut to the price of medicines in the 75-year history of the PBS, putting more than $200 million every single year back into the pockets of hardworking Australian patients. But there is more that the government can and the government should be doing here. Over summer the peak medicines experts, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, advised our government that more than 300 common medicines for chronic disease should be able to be supplied for 60 days rather than the current maximum of 30 days. This would bring us into line with pretty much every country to which we usually compare ourselves: the UK, New Zealand, Canada, France, Germany and so many others besides. It would halve the number of times those patients would have to visit the GP to get a routine repeat script, freeing up millions of GP consults, which everyone in this House knows is desperately needed. It would halve the cost of those common medicines for six million Australian patients living with chronic disease—medicines for blood pressure, heart disease, cholesterol, Crohn's disease and so much more. Overseas evidence tells us that this extra dispensing arrangement will increase medication compliance by up to 20 per cent. The AMA said this is a win for patients, ultimately delivering better health outcomes and taking pressure off the health system. This is good for the hip pockets of Australian patients, and it's good for their health as well, which is why a long list of patient groups— Opposition members interjecting— Mr BUTLER HWK I notice that the opposition is simply interjecting with the pharmacy lobby's talking points, not patient groups. Asthma Australia, the Heart Foundation, Diabetes Australia, the Breast Cancer Network, the Consumer Health Forum—name a patients' group that has opposed this measure. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Climate Change and Energy, the member for Groom and the member Barker will cease interjecting. Mr BUTLER HWK It is not for the first time that government has got this advice, because five years ago the former government got the same advice from the same advisory committee, and, instead of choosing the interest of patients, they chose to do nothing. Over those five years, hundreds of millions of dollars have been paid by patients when their medicines' experts told them they didn't have to. Child Care 33 15:06 Ms SPENDER 286042 Wentworth My question is to the minister for industrial relations. One of your arguments for last year's IR reforms was the need to increase wages for childcare workers. Six months later, no multi-employer bargains have been completed, childcare workers don't have commitments to increase wages and some childcare centres in Wentworth, like the one I saw last week, are only offering half the places because of staff shortages. Wouldn't it have been better to fix the awards and make a difference to families and workers now? 15:06 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I thank the member for Wentworth for the question. I'll go through a couple of different issues that are raised. First of all, in terms of the award review, which was something that the member for Wentworth sought during the debate and was ultimately negotiated with the Senate as well with Senator Pocock, there are further discussions happening now about the nature of that award review. The review of the awards is in particular in the context of the new objectives in the act, and those objectives go both to secure employment and to gender equality, which obviously is particularly significant for the rates of pay for people who are working as early childhood educators. In terms of multi-employer bargaining, the different parts of the act commence on different dates. The multi-employer provisions haven't started yet, so the reason why no multi-employer agreements have been concluded for early childhood education is those sections of the act don't commence until June. What we have seen, though, is exactly what I predicted in the sense that, immediately, we have seen a whole lot of employers come back to the table on individual enterprise agreements with their workforce, workplace by workplace. Our preference is always that you get individual workplaces negotiating and having those agreements in place. That's always the best option, but the problem has been, in a whole lot of feminised sectors, that hasn't worked. That's why we needed to open up the rules for multi-employer bargaining. They commence in June, so right now we're in a phase where we're seeing a really serious acceleration in the number of negotiations that are happening for enterprise agreements, and I expect, the moment that the laws start to open up in June, that's when we will logically see an increase in the engagement with multi-employer bargaining. Infrastructure Funding 34 15:08 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore My question is to the minister for infrastructure. How will the Albanese Labor government clean up previous failures affecting the infrastructure investment pipeline and ensure that Australians can believe what the government says when it comes to major infrastructure projects? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The minister has the call and will be heard in silence. 15:09 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat Thanks so much for the question. Ms Ley 00AMN Not even Albo wants to hear this rubbish. The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition—I've been more than fair, and she's a serial offender at this. I'm going to warn her now. I'm going to allow the minister to restart her answer and reset the clock. Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR The deputy leader opposite does this constantly, and I appreciate the protection of the chair. It is a constant interjection. Honourable members interjecting— Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR She's doing it even now. Can I just say thank you very much to the member for Gilmore for the question. She knows just how important infrastructure investments are for our regions and for our cities. But, more importantly, she knows how important it is that when you promise to deliver infrastructure, it is actually delivered. That is why reforming the $120 billion infrastructure investment pipeline is so incredibly important. The previous government left this pipeline in a total mess, riddled with projects that were simply underfunded, had no funding partner, had not actually had proper cost-benefit analysis done and had not got the support of the states and territories. They were poorly scoped and were simply unable to be delivered. We saw the pipeline grow from 150 projects to 800 projects, a large number of which were under $50 million and simply could never be delivered. If the previous government somehow thought that they were going to deliver every single one of those 800 projects that were poorly funded, under scoped and not supported by the states and territories, then they had rocks in their heads. That is why we have had to look closely at this infrastructure investment pipeline. We want to make sure that if we promise a project, we actually deliver the project. That is what our regions deserve, it's what our rural communities deserve and it's what our cities absolutely deserve. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hinkler is warned. Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR The growth in this infrastructure investment pipeline won't surprise anyone. Where was the major growth from 2016 to 2019? What was happening in that time? There were election campaigns on! That's the way in which those opposite used public money in infrastructure to invest in projects that suited their political purposes right the way across the country—so they could put out a press release. I've said before that you cannot drive on a press release! We are doing the hard work of cleaning up the mess that those opposite left an incredibly important part of this budget in. One hundred and twenty billion dollars has to be delivered through the infrastructure investment pipeline, and it can only be delivered if we look at every project. We will look at the cost of those projects and make sure that we can actually deliver them—that we have funding partners for them. We are cleaning up the mess that has been left by those opposite, to make sure that we can deliver infrastructure in our rural communities, in our regions and right the way across our thriving and growing suburbs. Cost of Living 34 15:12 Mr CONAGHAN 279991 Cowper My question is to the Prime Minister. My constituent Robert Withers lives in Port Macquarie, in my electorate of Cowper. His recent electricity bill showed that he had reduced his usage by 10 per cent from the same period last year. However, the charges have risen by 40 per cent. The Prime Minister promised Australians, like Robert, that he would cut their power bills by $275, but Robert is now $800 out of pocket in real terms. Why do Australians always pay more under Labor? Honourable members in terjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 I heard 'why do Australians', so I will allow— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! We can simply move on if you want to. Everyone just remain silent. The question is in order—just. I just remind members that there are time limits. I give the call to the Prime Minister regarding the couple of sentences at the end that were short. 15:13 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Thank you, Mr Speaker. The question is indeed why! Why did those opposite vote against $1.5 billion of energy price relief? Why? Why did they? Why did the member for Cowper not tell Robert Withers that he voted against $1.5 billion of energy price relief? Why did those opposite oppose cheaper medicines? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why did those opposite oppose cheaper child care? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why did those opposite oppose an increase in the minimum wage? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why aren't those opposite supporting an increase in aged care? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why don't they support anything? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why indeed, Mr Speaker! Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The House will come to order. Members on my right will cease interjecting immediately. It's a big day today. Can everyone remain silent so I can hear from the Manager of Opposition business on a point of order. Mr Fletcher L6B On relevance, Mr Speaker. Why can't this Prime Minister give a straight answer? The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. The manager knows that isn't a point of order, and he does have the MPI today. The Prime Minister will continue with his answer. Mr ALBANESE R36 Why did they oppose 180,000 fee-free TAFE places, with the skills shortages? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why are they opposing closing the gender pay gap? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why is it that they refuse to come out and support the increase in single parent payments? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why didn't they support manufacturing jobs through the National Reconstruction Fund? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why don't they support the Housing Australia Future Fund? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why did they oppose their own safeguard mechanism? Government members: Why? Mr ALBANESE R36 Why indeed, Mr Speaker! They had nine years in office. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Prime Minister will pause. The member for Wentworth on a point of order? We have already had one point of order on relevance. Ms Spender 286042 This is a point of order on disorderly conduct. I don't see that this is orderly conduct for the parliament. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 I'm going to ask the House to come to order. I thank the member for her point of order. The Prime Minister will return to the question. Mr ALBANESE R36 The question is 'why'; what you'll see tonight is 'what'. You'll see a government that's absolutely committed to providing cost-of-living relief for people who are most vulnerable and who need it. That's what you'll see tonight, and you'll see it in a way that puts downward pressure on inflation and doesn't increase it. That's what a responsible government, dealing with the global challenge of inflation, is bound to do. And what we will do as well going forward is make sure that we are focused on that short term, but always with an eye and a strategy for the medium and long term. That's what our policy on climate is about, cheaper, cleaner energy driving new industries, driving new manufacturing, along with our skills policy to provide people with the employment to do it. That's the 'what'. Indeed, those opposite are so focused on themselves, when they look at each other they just ask themselves, 'Why indeed?' Online Safety 36 15:18 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby My question is to the Minister for Communications. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to support the safety of Australians, and what challenges has the government been facing to deliver on this objective? 15:18 Ms ROWLAND 159771 Greenway I thank my most excellent colleague for her question. Keeping Australians safe is the core priority of the Albanese government, and that includes online safety, which has traditionally been an area of bipartisanship. This government is now undertaking the substantive work to ensure that the Online Safety Act is successfully implemented together with our regulator, the eSafety Commissioner. ESafety provides critical support to Australians who experience online abuse. Just to give you some sense of scale, since 1 July last year eSafety has provided support to children, parents and schools in response to over 1,200 complaints under its Cyberbullying Scheme. ESafety also received over 6,000 reports of image based abuse and completed over 12,000 investigations in relation to illegal and restricted content. The eSafety Commissioner is also dealing with new and emerging online harms, including challenges posed by generative AI, which can be used to make what are called deepfakes. When generated with malice, deepfakes can be incredibly harmful. It's particularly concerning to hear about this technology being used to target women, who we know are more likely to experience online abuse that is personal, sexualised and violent. eSafety has powers to remove deepfake images that constitute image based abuse. As these technologies are adopted more widely, eSafety's work will continue to be relevant and a high priority of this government. Despite this, eSafety faces a funding cliff thanks to the decisions made by those opposite, who left the regulator with a host of non-ongoing or terminating funding measures. After 30 June, eSafety's overall funding would drop by more than half. The question asks about safety. Those opposite liked to announce how important various agencies and programs were, but they left them seriously underfunded. We discovered this in respect of not only eSafety but also the Viewer Access Satellite Television service and other areas where Australians rely on the government to keep them safe and connected. For example, those opposite announced cell broadcast national messaging to ensure Australians could receive critical emergency warnings, but they actually underfunded it, so it couldn't proceed. Last week, I announced that our upcoming budget ensures this critical project can be delivered, as well as public safety mobile broadband—yet another vital safety project that languished under the previous government. The Albanese government is left once again to clean up the mess left by those opposite, but we're getting on with the job of delivering a better and safer future for all Australians. Prime Minister 36 15:21 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack My question is to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister promised cheaper electricity bills, cheaper mortgages, no changes to superannuation, and that Australians would be better off, interest rates would be lower, the cost of living would be lower and Kevin Rudd would not be the ambassador to the US. Why has the Prime Minister broken every one of these promises? An honourable member interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 It was about the Prime Minister's commitments. I give the call to the Prime Minister. 15:22 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler What we promised at the election was a better future, and tonight's budget will provide a stronger foundation to achieve that better future. Opposition members interjecting— Mr Hamilton 291387 You're adding to the list! The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting. The member for Groom is warned. Mr ALBANESE R36 The Minister for Communications just outlined the issue with the office of the eSafety Commissioner, the funding for which would end on June 30 under the provisions made by those opposite. But it's not alone. There were child and youth mental health programs—stopped funding. There were family violence prevention legal service providers. There's myGov: My Health Record would not exist were it not funded by us in this budget, because its funding dropped off on 30 June. There are issues such as the National Library of Australia's Trove, which has been so important for researchers—again, no funding. There's the Australian Radioactive Waste Agency funding for nuclear waste management, slated to end in December 2023. Then there are the examples of unfunded and underinvested programs going forward. There were big announcements from the former Prime Minister about the Brisbane Olympic Games but, unfortunately, not a dollar of funding—not one dollar for the Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic Games. There was nothing for the Commonwealth biosecurity operating costs shortfalls, nothing for Questacon operations to be fixed up, nothing for the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust that was needed. There was underinvestment in Commonwealth national parks like Kakadu. In a building just down the road here, called the National Gallery of Australia, we have, thanks to Gough Whitlam and his vision, one painting that is worth half a billion dollars—one artwork—yet they have buckets there because of water dripping from the leaky roof due to underfunding. Tonight, my government is getting on with putting together a budget that tackles the immediate challenges, better shares opportunities and lays the foundation for a better and more secure future. Housing 37 15:24 Ms ROBERTS 157125 Pearce My question is to the Minister for Housing and the Minister for Homelessness. What were the outcomes of the recent housing ministers council meeting, including in relation to the housing legislative package that is before the parliament? 15:25 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I thank the member for Pearce for that important question. She, like many of us in this place, would like more social and affordable rental homes in electorates right across the country. Indeed, that is what we're trying to do. We had the fourth housing ministers meeting in Canberra last week where we discussed the broader ambitious housing policy of the federal government. Indeed, we talked about the whole reform agenda. Critical to that agenda, but not the only thing we're doing of course, is the Housing Australia Future Fund Bill—the $10 billion of the Housing Australia Future Fund— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Bowman is now warned. Ms COLLINS HWM that will be there in perpetuity, with returns every year invested in more social and affordable housing right across the country. Indeed, this is our election commitment. We took it to the last election. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Deakin is warned. Ms COLLINS HWM When we had it in this chamber, the House of Representatives, those opposite voted against it, except of course the member for Bass. I thank all of the crossbench again for their support. Of course, the Greens party didn't vote at all. When it was considered by the housing ministers last week, every single one of them, including the Liberal minister from Tasmania, signed a letter urging senators to pass this bill. I want to read some of this letter to the House today. The letter says: The Housing Australia Future Fund is an important step towards providing more Australians a safe and secure home. It provides an ongoing stream of commonwealth funds to support the delivery of social and affordable housing. It was signed by all eight housing ministers from right across the country. But of course it's not just the housing ministers who are supporting this fund; critically it's the people on the front line—the people who are providing homelessness services and the people who are building houses, the construction sector. National Shelter are supporting the bill and want it passed by the parliament. Homelessness Australia supports the bill and wants it passed by the parliament. The Community Housing Industry Association supports the bill and wants it passed by the parliament. Both Master Builders and the Housing Industry Association support the bill and want it passed by the parliament. Industry Super wants the bill to be supported by the parliament. All of the sector involved in supplying more social and affordable rental homes is supporting this bill, so I say to members opposite and to the Greens party: 'Talk to your senators. Tell your senators to support this bill. The time for political grandstanding and further games is over.' There are vulnerable Australians out there today who are relying on this bill to get passed so that we can get more social and affordable homes on the ground for those Australians who need it most. I table the document signed by the housing ministers. Interest Rates 37 15:28 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, you promised Australians cheaper mortgages, but after 10 interest rate rises in a row on your watch the average borrower is now paying 62 per cent more in repayments than in 2020 and in almost half of New South Wales postcodes the average repayment is more than 40 per cent of median income. Prime Minister, why do Australians always pay more under Labor? 15:29 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I'll begin addressing the question and then I'll ask the housing minister to make some further remarks because I haven't given myself other jobs, unlike my predecessor. We understand that interest rates now are placing pressure on families, but they are less than when her Leader of the Opposition was the Assistant Treasurer. That's just a fact. If we are going to deal with housing issues, I'd say, very simply, that there is one thing that they could do today, which is vote for the Housing Australia Future Fund Bill that is before the Senate. Another thing that people learn in economics degrees is supply and demand. If you have more houses, you will have an impact on price. That is a product of supply and demand. There is a bill before the Senate right now that will lead to 30,000 additional social and affordable homes being built for people in need in this country. Those opposite will have no credibility. Whether it's those opposite here, or the Greens political party, they will have no credibility on housing issues while they stand in the way of the Housing Australia Future Fund. I will see if the minister wishes to add the answer. 15:30 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I thank the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister is absolutely right. When the housing ministers met in Canberra last week, the Housing Supply and Affordability Council chair addressed the housing ministers, and she said the answer to the questions around housing today is supply, supply and supply. That is what we're trying to do with the Housing Australia Future Fund: add to supply. It is part of our broad spectrum of housing policies that includes, of course, that National Housing Accord and the $575 million that we have already unlocked, which has houses being built on the ground today for Australians. It includes the regional first home buyer guarantee that we brought forward so more regional Australians could— The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will pause. The Minister for Cyber Security and Minister for Home Affairs will cease interjecting. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order? Mr Fletcher L6B Yes, Mr Speaker, on relevance. The question was about the interest being paid by people buying housing in the private housing market. An answer about supply through the housing council has nothing to say about the prices that people are paying today on their mortgage. The minister should be directed back to the question. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll listen carefully to the minister. She was talking about housing supply, and I'll make sure she links that to the question regarding the issue of interest rates, but I'll give her the call. It is relevant, but I'll listen carefully to what she's saying. Ms COLLINS HWM I say to the member opposite: the issue here in Australia is that we do have a supply issue. We have fewer homes per thousand people in Australia than the OECD average, and that has been going on for a long period of time, which is why we need to build more, which is what the National Housing Accord is about. It's an ambition to build a million homes from 1 July 2024. We have an agreement with the states and the territories, and with the construction sector, to actually get these homes up and running. We have the states that are going to respond to the National Cabinet, and the planning ministers are also going to meet on unlocking supply so that we can put downward pressure on housing prices. That is what we are doing. Environmental Conservation 38 15:32 Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Lingiari My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. How is the Albanese Labor government caring for our environment and heritage after a decade of neglect? 15:33 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney Our government is absolutely determined to protect more of what is precious, repair more of what has been damaged and manage nature better for the future. Nobody knows the state of Kakadu National Park and Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park better than the member for Lingiari, formerly the Territory MP and now the federal MP for Kakadu. She spent 10 years as the head of the Northern Land Council. She knows it like the back of her hand. She knows that it has been neglected and let down by those opposite for more than a decade. Those opposite hid the State of the environment report. You know why? Because they left the state of the Australian environment in a bad state and getting worse. In contrast, what are we doing? We are doubling funding for Commonwealth national parks—national parks like Kakadu, like Uluru-Kata Tjuta, like Booderee and like the marine parks—because we know that what has been happening is the slow decline of our national parks. In Kakadu, you've got crocodile signs missing. You've got campgrounds and tracks that are shut to tourists because they are not safe. We want to make sure that these properties are protected for the future. We have invested $45.2 million in the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust, because what we were left by those opposite was these properties in a state of disrepair. I visited with a number of local members to see the cracked seawalls and the convict-built architecture falling into the harbour. We can't afford to let our national estate decline in this way. What you'll see from us tonight in the budget is a doubling of funding for those Commonwealth national parks. You'll see an extra $163 million for the Australian Institute of Marine Science. In Townsville, they had a whole wing of laboratories closed because the machinery is out of date, there's mould in the roof and the offices aren't safe for our scientists to use. So we're doubling funding for the Australian Institute of Marine Science as well, left unfunded by those opposite. This will create 100 extra jobs in Townsville. It will create 110 extra jobs in our national parks. Many of them, of course, will be held by First Nations Australians, and I'm very proud of that. That means a better tourism experience for people visiting our national estate, and, most importantly, it means that the places that are special for Australians and the plants and animals that are at risk will be better protected, for us, for our kids, for our grandkids. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The House will come to order. I will hear from the member for Wannon in silence. The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister will cease interjecting. Migration 39 15:36 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the Prime Minister. With Australians facing record net overseas migration of 715,000 people over the next two years, why is there no plan to address the further pressure this will put on costs of living, with increased rents, a worsening housing crisis, longer hospital wait times and increased congestion in capital cities? How much will Australians pay for Labor's big Australia policy? 15:37 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Well, that was worth waiting for! On that, I make four points: (1) those opposite are opposed to increasing the supply of housing, which is in the Senate at the moment under the Housing Australia Future Fund; (2) migration numbers that they projected before the pandemic would have seen a higher population today than is now present. That's the second point. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Wannon has asked his question. Mr ALBANESE R36 The third point is that there was a pandemic. In areas such as education, which is a great asset to Australia, a great export that we have, our largest services export, we used to have, say, 100,000 students come in and 100,000 students finish their university degree and then leave. Because of the pandemic, we've had people coming but not going yet. Hence, you have a spike in numbers there. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Wannon has asked his question and will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 Four, I commend to the shadow minister our migration plan, announced by the minister at the National Press Club. He should have come along; next time, I'll shout him a ticket. We had minister after minister in the last fortnight standing up at the National Press Club talking about directions— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Bendigo will cease interjecting. The member for Wannon on a point of order. Mr Tehan 210911 The 715,000 net overseas migration number— T 53517 The member for Wannon has been here long enough to know that is an abuse of standing orders. You don't simply get up to the dispatch box and start speaking. He has done it before. If he does it again, he'll be asked to leave the chamber. Mr R36 To be fair, it's been a while since he got a question! I commend the shadow minister to have a read of the magnificent speech by the Minister for Home Affairs outlining why Australia's over-reliance on temporary migration by those opposite is not in Australia's national interests, outlining why it is in Australia's national interests to get the right migrants in the right places in order to help our economy. As the minister said, if you look at the plan, it's certainly not about an increase. It's about getting the right mix of migration, as the minister said on page 1 of the paper! National Collecting Institutions 39 15:40 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra My question is to the Minister for the Arts. How has the Albanese Labor government changed previous approaches in order to recognise the importance of the national collecting institutions to Australia? 15:41 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I thank the member for Canberra for the question and acknowledge her strong advocacy for the national collecting institutions. All of those national collecting institutions, whether it be the Portrait Gallery, the National Gallery, the Archives, the National Museum, Bundanon or the Maritime Museum, have the same essential job, which is to tell the story of Australia. Because of the way they've been mismanaged over the last decade, they also tell a story about economic management. It's not a story you would want to tell. The first concept of economic management with respect to these institutions should be that, if you start with the concept that they hold our most valuable items, you probably want to protect them. You probably don't want, in the National Gallery, our most valuable artworks to be in a building that leaks. If you're talking about the National Library, you think, 'What do you have to do to look after a book?' A starting principle is that you don't put it in the water. But for the National Library, it wasn't just the roof that was leaking; it was the windows that were leaking as well. But, to go one better, at the National Maritime Museum the pontoons were sinking. So it wasn't enough for them to have the water coming down from above; at the National Maritime Museum they were trying to get the museum itself to fall right down to sea level. That's the way they left it. Why was it left this way? Because each of these organisations—already underfunded—was facing a funding cliff. When the Prime Minister went out to announce the new funding, with the Minister for Finance, out at the National Gallery, the member of staff who took us through the National Gallery was their director of First Nations. You would think this was an essential position at the National Gallery. But, under their funding, that position had to be funded through donations. This was not an add-on position at the National Gallery. This was the director of First Nations. That's what the person was in charge of, and even that position was not funded. As of this year, the funding cliff has gone. These organisations now will be funded, for the workers to now know they still have a job and for the organisations to know that they now can plan for the future for the first time. Finally, these organisations will know that we will no longer have a situation where the items in the museum are in a place with silica dust flying into it—that now our national institutions will be protected as they always should have been. Budget 40 15:44 Mr VIOLI 300147 Casey My question is to the Prime Minister. EY economist Cherelle Murphy says additional net spending in the budget makes inflation worse, whatever it's form, saying: … the cost will potentially be higher interest rates, which households and businesses cannot afford. Why do Australians always pay more under Labor? 15:44 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I sincerely thank the member for that question. In April of last year, in PEFO, as a result of the March budget that was in that last week so that a government could cling on for a bit longer—a government that didn't have an agenda—it projected the budget deficit this year, in 2022-23, to be $77.9 billion. That was the prediction. And, of course, we know that the government again—I give credit to the member here and I suggest he dissociate himself from the past because what he mightn't be aware of is that the largest deficit in Australian political history was by the coalition that preceded. The second-largest deficit in Australian was those opposite as well. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Deakin is on a warning. Mr ALBANESE R36 You have a political party that the last time it was in charge of the Treasury benches produced Australia's largest-ever budget deficit in history, the time before was the second-largest budget deficit in history. They got all the prizes. If you had a pedestal there, like at the Olympics, they'd be up there getting the gold medal, silver medal and bronze—gold, silver and bronze. You'll see tonight what a responsible budget looks like. Aboriginal And Torres Strait Islander Voice 40 15:46 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Australians. What support does the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament have in our Australian community? 15:46 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton Today I welcome news that the NRL formally supports an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament, and I'm glad to see that we've got some Dogs people up in the gallery. How are you? That's my team. First Nations communities have deep bonds with rugby league and are part of the game's fabric at all levels. From Joel Thompson to Nicho Hynes, from Johnathan Thurston to the great Latrell Mitchell— Mr Albanese R36 Don't forget GI. Ms BURNEY 8GH and GI, of course, the NRL would be unrecognisable today without the enormous contribution of Indigenous players. The NRL joins an amazing list, and the support is growing day by day: the NRL, the Australian Olympic Committee, Tennis Australia, the Collingwood Football Club, the West Coast Eagles football club, Carlton and Adelaide. The great Eddie Betts said: It's a small step, but I think it's the right step, to have a Voice and be heard. I've taken the time over the past 12 months to speak to elders, community members and people I trust to get more information about the Voice.    …   …   … I feel like it's the opening of a pathway to make sure we're included and respected in decision-making on issues that affect us. As Peter FitzSimons in the Herald wrote: … if the Voice gets up with the support of Australian sport, it will be able to look back with pride in decades to come on the fact that it was on the right side of history—the way Peter Norman was at the Mexico Olympics supporting the black athletes on the podium… It's not just the NRL. It's Qantas, Wesfarmers, Woolworths, the Law Council, the Business Council of Australia, the ACTU, FECCA, the Arab Council of Australia, the Imam Council of Australia, all state and territory first ministers, religious charities too numerous to mention, all churches, universities and, most importantly, tens and tens of thousands of individuals. Can I just say that this will make a practical difference on the ground, and that's what the Voice will do. Over the next few months, thousands of conversations will happen across this country about what the Voice is and why it is needed now. It will make a difference. I know and I have absolute faith in the Australian people saying 'yes'. Mr Albanese R36 After 28 questions I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER 41 STATEMENT BY THE SPEAKER Budget 41 15:49 The SPEAKER 53517 Before members leave the House, I have a statement to make about proceedings for the budget and budget reply. I ask all members to note the usual arrangements in place for budget week and, importantly, the courtesies that will apply to the Treasurer's budget speech this evening and equally to the Leader of the Opposition's speech in reply on Thursday evening. As with all proceedings in the House, the member with the call is entitled to speak without interruption. In accordance with precedent, should I determine that a member be required to leave the House under standing order 94(a), the member will be advised by written note. I ask all members to ensure that their guests arrive at the galleries in good time to undertake the secondary security clearance and to be seated by 7.10 pm. I trust there will be cooperation from members and their invited guests in the galleries, for whom they are responsible. It should be the aim of all members that both nights proceed smoothly for the benefit of the House and for those watching and listening to proceedings. To finish off, for the information of members, the speech clock will be on but only as a guide. Standing order 1 provides that there is no time limit for the Treasurer or the Leader of the Opposition for this debate. I thank the House. QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER 41 QUESTIONS TO THE SPEAKER Questions in Writing 41 15:50 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield Mr Speaker, in accordance with standing order 105(b), I wish to draw your attention to two overdue questions in writing: questions Nos 71 and 69. On 6 February 2023, I asked the Minister for Government Services about ICT job cuts at Services Australia. I also asked the minister about the minister's meeting with members of the myGov user audit. I ask that you write to the Minister for Government Services seeking his reasoning as to why he has not responded for more than 60 days, in contravention of the standing orders. 15:51 The SPEAKER 53517 I shall respond as the standing orders require. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting or leave the chamber. Questions in Writing 41 15:51 Mr JOYCE e5d New England Mr Speaker, also in accordance with standing order 105(b), I wish to draw your attention to two overdue questions in writing: questions Nos 82 and 86. Can I ask that you write to the Minister for Health and Aged Care and the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and seek their explanation as to why they have chosen to contravene the standing orders by not answering these questions for more than 60 days. 15:52 The SPEAKER 53517 I shall respond as the standing orders require. AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS 41 AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS Reports Nos 17 to 20 of 2022-23 41 15:52 The SPEAKER 53517 I present the Auditor-General's Audit reports Nos 17 to 20 for 2022-23. Details of the reports will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. Documents made parliamentary papers. DOCUMENTS 42 DOCUMENTS Presentation 42 15:52 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 42 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Cost of Living 42 15:52 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable the Manager of Opposition Business proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The cost of living crisis and the Prime Minister's broken promise that Australians would be better off under his government. 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— 15:52 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield Around Australia, this Prime Minister's cost-of-living crisis is affecting millions of Australians. The Prime Minister was pretty clear in the promises he made before the last election. He promised to reduce energy bills by $275 not once, not twice but 97 times. Of course he promised there would be cheaper mortgages, and he promised that Australians would be better off under a Labor government. It was all very clear and very simple. It did not admit of any doubt. So Australians would naturally be very troubled to find that the reality today is extraordinarily different from what this Prime Minister promised. Inflation is at its highest level in over 30 years, core inflation is higher than in the US, Britain, Canada and indeed every G7 nation, and electricity prices have gone up and up and up. It is in the experiences of Australian families and households where we see the true toll of this government's escalating cost-of-living crisis. Australian families are experiencing the largest fall in their spending power in this century as more and more families struggle with the crippling effects of inflation. Australian families are even resorting to changing their diets, with one report showing that two-thirds of Australians are finding it less affordable to eat healthily. Banks are reporting more Australian families are falling behind on their repayments, and higher-risk customers can't even get a loan or get refinancing. Business collapses are surging, with warnings of an insolvency Armageddon as Labor's first year in office has seen almost a doubling in the rate at which businesses are becoming insolvent. More Australians with mental health concerns are being forced to cancel appointments with psychologists because they simply can't afford them. Growing numbers of Australians cannot afford to maintain their cars, and they are skipping vital maintenance and repairs. Mortgage risk reports are showing more and more Australian towns and suburbs are entering mortgage shock, with repayments eating up to 60 per cent of household income in some post codes. More than three-quarters of Australians report that they are either extremely or very concerned about the cost of living, with most saying electricity prices are a key concern. The gap between the cost of a typical home and the amount that an average Australian can borrow has more than doubled. More and more Australians are resorting to having meals at home and buying generic brands of food and groceries under this Labor government's cost-of-living crisis. More and more Australians are buying canned food because they cannot afford to buy fresh fruit and vegetables. Australians are turning to charities for support, with Lifeline and other crisis providers reporting huge increases in the number of families requesting their assistance, including, in many cases, families that have never before needed to turn to a crisis provider for help. Families are facing no option but to cut back on non-essential purchases. According to the national youth mental health survey, the cost of living is the single biggest concern for young Australians. According to analysis by Deloitte Access Economics, at least 300,000 Australian households may be experiencing negative cashflow—more money going out than coming in—following the 10 interest rate rises on this government's watch. The St Vincent de Paul Society in Queensland has reported that more families, particularly young women, are being forced to sleep in their cars due to this government's cost-of-living crisis. The CEO of Foodbank in Queensland recently said: As cost of living continues to rise, families are being forced to choose between keeping a roof over their heads and putting food on the table. This is a very grim picture, and there is very little reason to be confident that this government has a plan to deal with it. It is absolutely critical that there be a focus on inflation—getting inflation down, attacking those cost-of-living increases. That will be the test of this budget—whether it puts downward pressure on inflation. When inflation is high it erodes purchasing power, it eats away at savings and it lowers the standard of living. This is the central economic issue facing Australians—the need to get inflation down. Fighting inflation with handouts is not the solution to this problem. We need a government which is addressing the problem of inflation at its source, not the symptoms. If Labor were serious about tackling inflation, it would build on the strong economic management that it inherited from the previous coalition government. It would restore the fiscal guardrails to the budget, including the goal of budget balance and including the tax to GDP cap. Is it any surprise that under this Labor government there is now no formal rule as to the maximum percentage of tax it says it will collect as a percentage of GDP? Labor is seeking to distract from its spending plans by dropping to the media that the budget will be in surplus for 2022-23, but the real story is what happens in 2023-24, the actual year the Treasurer is preparing a budget for, and in the out years beyond that. A short-term surplus thanks to a one-off jump in commodity export prices and strong employment numbers inherited from the Morrison government is one thing, but a structural deficit over the next few years as Labor fails to get spending under control is very bad news for the Australians who are concerned that inflation will become entrenched and that their cost of living will go up and up. The simple fact is: if this government does not get spending under control, this budget will drive more inflation. Unless this government limits spending, it will be adding to the cost of your mortgage, your rent, your groceries and just about everything else Australians need to spend their hard-earned money on. We need to see from this government and this budget a long-term approach to controlling spending. It is critical that the economy is growing faster than spending. That's how the coalition operated between 2013 and 2019, prior to a once-in-a-century pandemic, and it was that budget rule, that fiscal discipline, which produced the outcome of a steadily reducing budget deficit until we achieved budget balance. But that is very different to the psychology and the instinctive nature of Labor governments. There is nothing a Labor government likes to do more than spend and tax. We've seen the pattern with every previous Labor government, and already we are seeing the same pattern materialise when it comes to the Albanese Labor government. In the October budget, we saw the Albanese Labor government add $115 billion of spending over the four years of the forward estimates compared to the budget brought down by the Morrison government in March 2022. There's another $45 billion of spending that we have opposed because that is not what our budget needs. It's not what our fiscal policy needs. It's not what we need as a nation if we are going to attack the core problem which is challenging the lives and lifestyles of every Australian—that is, the problem of inflation and ever-rising cost of living. As this government adds more spending, it also adds additional interest costs over many years into the future. We saw a very traditional Labor approach in its first budget in October last year. We saw Labor increase spending, making the structural deficit worse, and we saw Labor abandon any formal goal of achieving budget balance. That's not a responsible approach. It's not good budget management, and we see now that, around Australia, Australian households and Australian families are paying a price for this government's poor management of the budget. The other very important reason to keep spending under control is: if you're controlling spending, you don't need to go around raising taxes. Higher taxes are a huge problem. They kill aspiration. They hurt families. They delay the investment that provides jobs and helps small businesses to grow. Australian families, every day, every week, are making very tough decisions about their household budgets. It is imperative that we have, as a nation, a budget that also involves decisions that address the fundamental problem of cost of living and inflation. 16:03 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper I am really beginning to worry about those on the opposite side of the House. Maybe they're deaf, maybe they're a bit dim—I don't know! They seem to be throwing this question at us time after time, and we tell them time after time that we understand that the cost of living is hitting a lot of Australians hard. We understand that inflation is the defining economic challenge of 2023. It was in 2022—and, as the Prime Minister mentioned today, those opposite, when they were in government, had an inflation measure the highest this century has seen. Australians understand that we did not create these challenges, but they elected us to take responsibility for addressing them—and we are. The Albanese Labor government is delivering the positive change that Australians voted for—and, can I remind them, that is including the good people of Aston. They recently voted for a Labor government, overwhelmingly—we had a wonderful Labor candidate in Mary Doyle—but they turned their back on the opposition. I am beginning to wonder if those opposite are not reading the tea leaves. Yes, we know there is a lot of work to do, but we are staying focused on easing the pressure on families and helping Australians manage their budgets. That is why the centrepiece of tonight's budget will be a $14.6 billion cost-of-living relief package. The first phase of this, for example, is our cheaper medicines policy. That came into effect on 1 January this year. The cheaper medicines policy is an incredibly important policy for so many Australians who are having to choose between taking their medicines or paying the rent or putting food on the table. As a former health professional, I have had, from time to time, people telling me that they just take medicines every other day because they think that is cheaper. We know that it is important they take them every single day. Or they might miss a month or a week. Now, they no longer have to do that. Tonight's budget will go further, delivering cheaper medicines for over six million Australians. We will halve unnecessary visits to the GP and the pharmacist just to fill a repeat script. This will save Australians up to $180 a year for every eligible medicine they buy. Thanks to my wonderful colleague here the Minister for Aged Care, Ms Wells, we are delivering a massive increase for our aged-care workers by giving them a wage rise, an $11.3 billion investment. That's a wage rise to some of the lowest-paid but most-valued workers in our economy, a wage rise which will actually help with the cost of living. Self-funded retirees will access a seniors card under this government, which will give them access to the concession rate of PBS medicines and bulk-billed GP visits. That is a massive saving for many, many retirees. These are just some of the measures that have been announced in my own portfolio of health and aged care. Outside health and aged care, we have already announced electricity bill relief, which those opposite voted against. We have increased support for single parents. The Treasurer will have much more to say about that tonight, but we know that this single measure alone will have a massive impact on single parents struggling to meet the rising cost of living. We have successfully argued for a Fair Work Commission wage rise in line with inflation. We have introduced legislation that will drive investment in cleaner and cheaper energy, putting downward pressure on power prices. We are delivering cheaper child care, with one of the biggest investments in history in the cost of child care, which means that women can go back to work if they want to and will pay less for their child care. That, of course, will ease the cost-of-living pressures. We are delivering fee-free TAFE. You can't cut a cost of living measure any more than by making it free. This means that more people will get the skills they need to get good jobs—well paid jobs in our economy. We are expanding paid parental leave. When I had my babies, there was no paid parental leave—none at all—and we had to struggle along on one income. It was a great innovation by the Gillard government to introduce paid parental leave, and now we will be expanding that even more. This will, of course, ease the cost of living for parents. We are building more affordable homes, including through the new National Housing Accord. If those opposite could just see their way through to supporting the National Housing Future Fund, we would be able to build a lot more. We know that increasing supply will bring the cost of housing down, which will, of course, help people with the cost of living. Pensions, allowances and rent assistance have all increased in line with inflation. We are going to improve the bargaining system, which will make it easier for workers to get wage rises and create gender equality in the workplace, making sure that women get equal and better pay. Let's go back over some of these things I have said. What is it that those opposite don't get? We are easing pressure on families. We are introducing a relief package. There will be cheaper medicines and cheaper visits to the GP. We will have wage rises for aged-care workers and other low-paid workers. There will be downward pressure on power prices, cheaper child care, fee-free TAFE, expanded paid parental leave, more affordable homes and increased cost-of-living measures that will give more money to pensioners and people who need rent assistance. We will improve the wages of every worker in this country. They are all things that will actually help with the cost of living. Let's have a look at the Liberal legacy. They suppressed wage growth—suppressed wage growth—as a deliberate design feature of their government's economic policy. The now Leader of the Opposition, the then health minister, ripped out, or tried to rip out, $50 billion from hospitals; he tried to increase the cost of scripts by $5 and charge every Australian a tax on their visits to their GP. When Labor was able to block this attack on our health system and Australians' right to access it, he hit them with a Medicare rebate freeze. He was voted, by Australian doctors, the worst health minister in living memory, and we know that wasn't for nothing. So what a legacy! Compare what I said before with its opposite—with what the opposition did when they were in government. The opposition charged a bigger tax; they raised the price of scripts; they froze the Medicare rebate. Such a stellar record from the Leader of the Opposition and those opposite when it comes to cost-of-living relief! I can't help but sit here and think, when I listen to them go on and on and on about caring about people struggling with the cost of living, that they're pouring crocodile tears all the way down their face. They deliberately designed a decade of wage stagnation, froze the Medicare rebate and oversaw a decade of shameful neglect of our aged-care system; they refused to vote for energy bill relief; they said no to every single proposal that we have put forward to help Australian households. And yet they stand there and ask the same question over and over. Only Labor's government will do absolutely everything in its power to support Australians and Australian workers. We have given pay rises. We have given true cost-of-living relief. And this budget tonight will go even further than I have been able to outline tonight. It will be a sensible budget. It will give cost-of-living relief. It will manage inflation. It will repair the budget. It will clean up the mess that that government left from nine years of absolute neglect of this economy, of workers, of everyday Australians, because only Labor governments deliver real, tangible relief to Australian households. Australians know this. Australians voted for this. And only very recently did we see they voted for this in Aston. When will they listen? When will they get this through their heads? 16:13 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina I thank the member for Cooper for her time in her career as a health professional, and I acknowledge the fact that she was the 10th president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions. When you are heading a union body, wages are important, but so are real wages, and, when those opposite come in here and talk about wage increases, what they should be referring to is real wages, because real wages are going down. They are. Real wages—the take-home pay, the disposable income, of those hardworking Australians—are actually being reduced. Mr McCORMACK 219646 Now, I listened to you in silence, and you might give me the courtesy of listening to me in silence. Sitting next to her was the Minister for Aged Care, and I acknowledge the work that she is doing in that portfolio. I acknowledge the work that she's doing in the ministry of sport. But when you go and you talk to people in aged-care centres, to those running those country aged-care centres—and I appreciate they're saying that there's going to be a wage jump for those workers tonight, and that's good—some of those workers won't have an aged-care centre to go to, because of the 24/7 nursing edict that has been placed on them by those opposite. You get a good aged-care centre, such as the one I visited recently at Junee, and they are desperately worried that they won't be able to provide for their residents with 24/7 nursing. They can't find cleaners. They can't find cooks. They can't find people to change the beds, let alone 24/7 nursing. What are those aged-care centres supposed to do? And that is the case right over regional and, particularly, remote Australia, where aged-care centres are desperately worried. We know that the price of groceries is going up. We know that Scott's Refrigerated Transport is going backwards; they've been placed in liquidation. I heard the member for Cooper, the assistant minister, talking about building more houses. Jolly good! But who are they going to get to build those houses—let alone the materials to build those houses? That industry is absolutely going backwards, unfortunately. It was going alright under the home ownership schemes that we put in place. But that industry, the building industry, is doing it tough at the moment, and not helped by those opposite. I listened to the Minister for Housing going on not that long ago about a million houses. Good luck building them! Good luck finding the people to actually be able to build those houses! And then we come to students. You would think that those opposite would have placed students at the top of their expectations—at the top of their aspirations and the top of the care that they supposedly give. And yet the HECS debt is going to reach a 32-year high under those opposite. How do struggling students, such as those like Wagga Wagga's Maddison Dickinson—who still has, she says, about $6,000 to pay off on a HECS debt for partially completing a Bachelor of Paramedicine and a Bachelor of Arts—a 24-year-old, pay off her HECS debt when it's at a 32-year high? I don't know. Maybe those opposite could answer that question. Students are going to be hit with a seven-per-cent indexation rate at the beginning of June. Students are doing it tough, and all those opposite can do is to come in and say, 'Oh, well, we're bringing the budget back into surplus.' They haven't produced a surplus since 1989; Senator Claire Chandler wasn't even born the last time that Labor produced a surplus! But the fact remains that they demonise the coal industry, they demonise the gas industry and they demonise the resources sector, which is providing the iron ore, the resources and the export cheques. Then they gloat about producing a budget surplus on the back of that resources sector—which kept us going during COVID!—and on the back of the agriculture sector, which kept us going during COVID. And they're hitting the pharmacists hard—I'll get onto that in the next speech I make in this place. But the pharmacists are doing it tough. We have the assistant minister for regional health, a former pharmacist, belonging to a government which should know better. In some places, particularly in remote country Australia, the pharmacist is the only health professional in town. Why would you hit them so hard, to the point of closure? Why would you do that? It's all about the cost of living and they don't care! (Time expired) 16:18 Ms MURPHY 133646 Dunkley Member for Riverina: you asked about those nursing homes in your electorate who are concerned about 24/7 nurses being put on and whether they can do it. You asked the parliament, 'What are they supposed to do?' How about they speak to the excellent Minister for Aged Care, who is sitting right there, about the supports and exemptions that are in place? If you are not referring them to do that, then you're not doing your job! You're not doing your job, because she has said so many times that she is there to help any facility that has trouble meeting the 24/7 nurse legislation. There are exemptions and there are supports. So instead of coming in here and having a crack at the minister, do your job and speak to your nursing facilities that have concerns. Tell them to get in contact with the minister, her office and her department, and they will help them. That's because we are a government which brings in policies that make life better for people, and we do everything we can to implement them. That's as opposed to the last government, which did wonderful announcements and pretty good press releases, at times, but didn't implement anything. They didn't implement anything. I tell you what, if you want to find a minister who cares more about people than about herself and who works her fingers to the bone, then it's the Minister for Aged Care. Anyone who says differently—whose name might have an extra S in it—might look in the mirror and wonder what jealousy looks like, because then she will see it. The Albanese Labor government are doing what we can to address the cost-of-living issues that we inherited from nine years of wasted time, wasted spending and a lack of action. In my electorate, my community saved $259,743.57 on PBS medicines in January and February of this year alone. That's $260,000 saved in my electorate, where there are pockets of some of the most disadvantaged people in Victoria, where chronic health problems are way above the state average and where we know how important it is to be able to access medicines. Since the Albanese government reduced the co-payment on 1 January of this year, more than 22,800 scripts in Dunkley have been cheaper. This makes medicines more affordable and accessible, it takes the sting out of the rising cost of living and it delivers better outcomes for people who are often in the most vulnerable position of their lives. I put up a post on my Facebook page about cheaper medicines. Here's just one comment from Shaz: soooo good… I'm on a lot of meds so it just makes life easier that it is so cheap to buy. Elise wrote: At a time when things are more expensive and cost of living is really tough, this is such a huge benefit. Of course it is. And we are doing so much more to make medicines cheaper and more accessible. I know how hard it is to remember to go and fill your script every 3½ weeks, when you can only get it once a month. I know what the Minister for Health and Aged Care says about medicine compliance being lowest at the time when you have to fill your scripts. I can't tell you the number of times I might have not been able to take my medicine for a day or two because I forgot to fill my script. I know the difference 60-day dispensing is going to make to vulnerable people who have chronic health conditions—not to mention the vulnerable people with chronic health conditions who are also struggling because they don't earn much money or they're on a pension. It is going to make the world of difference to those people. Those on the other side can come here with their rhetoric and their ranting and their made-up situations, but we on this side know that the measures we're putting in place are making life better for Australians. (Time expired) 16:23 Ms BELL 282981 Moncrieff Tonight, the Treasurer will stand at the dispatch box and deliver what he claims is a cost-of-living budget—a budget that he says will deliver cost-of-living relief for Australians who need it most. The thing is we've heard that before from this government. We heard it when they promised a $275 reduction to your power bill, when they promised cheaper mortgages and when they promised no changes to super, lower inflation, no higher taxes, no changes to franking credits—the list goes on and on. Every single one of those promises has been broken, and it hasn't even been 12 months. And the cost of living for Australian families continues to rise. Groceries and petrol prices are soaring. Fruits and vegetables have increased in cost by 4.9 per cent and dairy products by a whopping 14.9 per cent. Families simply can't afford it. It's not the only thing that has gone up under this government. The last time Labor was in government, early childhood education fees skyrocketed by 53 per cent in just six years. In the last six months, already, out-of-pocket costs have gone up by 6.5 per cent. In only six months, they've gone up 6.5 per cent, and let's watch them go up further. Centres are struggling to cover the increasing costs of rent, of food and of wages, which means providers will continue to put their fees up. This leads to higher out-of-pocket costs, leaving families with less money to put food on their tables and to pay those bills. And yet this government continues to promise families they will be better off after 1 July. It's just another broken promise waiting to happen. This government likes to bang on about how they know how hard it is to struggle, that Labor cares about you and that the Prime Minister cares about you. Families are resorting to buying canned food, eating out less, falling behind in their repayments, skipping vital car repairs and even mental health appointments to make ends meet. It's not good enough for Australian families. Charities are inundated with requests for support and assistance, and they simply can't keep up. Families are literally choosing between keeping a roof over their heads and putting food on the table. And while you've been trying to figure out how you're going to pay your bills, the Prime Minister has the gall to say, 'It's been a good 10 months.' Well, maybe it has been a good 10 months for him. He has been gallivanting around the world, taking helicopters to barbecues and partying at lavish weddings, while you are suffering and can't pay your bills. When it comes to the Prime Minister, it doesn't matter what he says; it's about what he does, and his actions show time and again that he doesn't care about you or your family. Almost every day of the election campaign, the Prime Minister promised that he would show up and that he would take responsibility. Well, it's about time he did that. Unfortunately for many Australian families, this cost-of-living crisis will continue to get worse under Labor. Australian families are making tough decisions about their own budgets. Inflation is eating into Australians' pay packets and real wages are going backwards, causing the price of essential household goods and services to skyrocket. This government must show that they are prepared to do the same: to drive down the rate of inflation through budget measures, not a one-off sugar hit. Inflation comes from Canberra; it's not coming from Vladimir Putin and it's not coming from the war in Ukraine. I know that those opposite like to pretend it comes from somewhere else, but it comes directly from them and their decisions. Unless the government limits spending, Labor will continue to add to the cost of your mortgage, your rent, your groceries and just about everything else Australians are spending their hard-earned money on. I'm not holding my breath tonight about the budget for Australians and the cost-of-living crisis. The last time this lot were in government they spent billions on programs like school halls and the pink batts disaster, and cut essential funding for mental health and the PBS. They stopped listing medicines because they ran out of money. It sounds like they're reading more from their playbook; they have already cut mental health funding at the first opportunity. It's clear: you can't trust Labor to keep their promises. You can't trust Labor to run the economy, and Australians always pay more under Labor. 16:28 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid Two things magically happened on 21 May last year: the Albanese Labor government was elected—very exciting!—and the coalition suddenly realised there was an issue with the cost of living. It was a sudden realisation, because they didn't act on it during the nine years they were in government. Let's examine why their sudden interest in helping with the cost of living is such a charade now. Act No. 1: under the coalition, the cost of child care went up by 41 per cent. Seventy-three thousand families were locked out of child care because they couldn't afford it. What did that mean? It meant kids couldn't get the early education we know is so critical and it meant there were fewer parents heading back into the workforce and contributing to our economy. And, critically, when it comes to the cost of living, it was a hit to household budgets. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to address this? We have reduced the cost of child care for 96 per cent of families across Australia. Approximately 7,800 families in my electorate are going to benefit from this. Over nine years, those opposite allowed the cost of child care to rise and rise. Under the Albanese Labor government, from 1 July we are making child care more affordable. Act No. 2: power prices. This is probably where those opposite really excelled at acting. They acted like they were a government trying to come up with an energy policy. There were 22 attempts, but they couldn't deliver a single one, and, even when they had the chance to provide households with energy relief, they voted against it. Instead of siding with the Australian people, they sided with gas companies. They act like they care about reducing energy prices, but they voted for higher power prices. Contrast that with the Albanese Labor government. We have an energy policy that, first of all, isn't here after 22 attempts, and we are working our way through implementing it. We are upgrading our energy grid to enable more renewable energy to come online. Last year we capped gas and coal prices to shield Australians from the unprecedented international pressures on energy markets. We are acting on climate change and providing households with energy price relief. In tonight's budget we are helping five million households and one million businesses with a reduction in energy bills. Those opposite couldn't deliver an energy policy, couldn't give energy certainty and couldn't help with power bills for households. What could they do? And here we come to the final act. Here's one of the few policies they had when they were in government—nine long years, and they had one policy: robodebt. It is extraordinary that those opposite can come into this place and pretend to care about the cost of living when they were the architects of robodebt. It was an illegal and immoral policy that had devastating consequences for the most financially vulnerable in our community—and they knew it. It was those opposite who hounded the most vulnerable with unlawful debt notices, chasing them for debts they did not owe. It was those opposite who decided to play the role of debt collector, scaring Australians who were already right on the edge. Contrast that with the Labor government. In tonight's budget we are making it easier for those receiving the single parenting payment and JobSeeker. While those opposite put on the performance of a lifetime and pretend to care about the cost of living, we are actually taking action. For nine years under those opposite the cost of child care skyrocketed. They failed to deliver an energy plan and voted against providing energy price relief, and one of the few policies they had was robodebt. Today is performative. For nine years they did nothing on the cost of living. They may deserve a Gold Logie for their acting job today, but they don't deserve to be in government. That is why they were voted out on 21 May, and that's why they lost the seat of Aston, which is why we have the wonderful new member for Aston, Mary Doyle, amongst our ranks. 16:33 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes I thank the member for Reid for many of her remarks. I note that she has spoken about acting and Logie awards. I would just draw the House's attention and the member for Reid's attention to the Prime Minister's pledges that were made: household and business energy bills will be cut by $275—that's act 1; a real lasting plan for cheaper electricity and cheaper mortgages—that's act 2; Australians will be better off under a Labor government—that's act 3. When the current Prime Minister was opposition leader, he personally promised $275 power bill cuts no fewer than 97 times during the election campaign. Not only has the Prime Minister broken that promise; he refuses in question time to even answer any questions about power bills, and we saw that again today. The energy crisis affects Australians. It affects Australian families. It affects Australian businesses. Under the Albanese Labor government life has become progressively harder for many Australians. This is despite the Prime Minister's claim only a few months ago that it's 'been a pretty good 10 months for most Australians'. Pretty good? Rather than Australians being better off, Australians are paying more in the economy that exists under this Albanese Labor government. Australian families are experiencing the largest fall in their spending power this century, as more and more families struggle with the crippling effects of inflation. Families are even resorting to changing their diets, with one recent report showing two-thirds of people have found it less affordable to eat healthily. This includes Australians buying canned food because they can't afford fresh fruit and vegetables. This is a great shame. More and more Australians are resorting to having meals at home and buying generic brands of food and groceries. Our banks are reporting more Australian families are falling behind on their repayments, and higher-risk customers can't get loans or refinance. Recently, I spoke in this place about Caruso's Italian Restaurant, in the Sutherland shire. It was forced to close its doors permanently. They had been in the Sutherland shire for 17 years. Owners Rocky and Kerrin Pitarelli cited rising electricity costs, labour costs and staff shortages as reasons for their closure. More recently, in my electorate, Howling Forest cafes at Kirrawee and Kareela have closed, with proprietors Ange and Chad citing the current economic climate as the reason behind the closure. Last week I visited local businesses in the suburb of Sutherland with the shadow Treasurer. Cafe 2232 owner George explained they've had to increase their prices by 30 per cent over the past six to eight months. Scott's Florist owner Trudy reported a doubling and tripling of the price of fresh flowers. At Left Bower Cafe, Luke cited rising energy costs and the cost of dairy as issues facing their trade. Mandy from The Beauty Loft stated she had suffered $1,000 in cancellations the last time an interest rate rise was reported. We are seeing more Australians with mental health concerns being forced to cancel appointments with psychologists because they simply can't afford them. Mortgage risk reports are showing more and more Australian towns and suburbs are entering mortgage shock. In my electorate of Hughes, over 22,000 households are mortgage holders. With an average increase of more than $1,400 per month, this is impacting Australian families directly. The key test for tonight's budget is whether it will put downward pressure on inflation. The Albanese Labor government should deliver a budget with less spending to tackle its inflation crisis. Inflation comes from Canberra. After almost a year of inaction, Labor's budget must make bringing down inflation its No. 1 priority. 16:38 Ms MASCARENHAS 298800 Swan I'll start by saying that I know that families and households are doing it really tough at the moment, and it's a really challenging time. All households recognise that the cost of living has gone up, and it is an issue that my electorate talks to me about when I go doorknocking. However, I will remind the member for Hughes that, unfortunately, we've wasted a decade, with the coalition asleep at the wheel. A government needs to not only deal with the issues of the day but also plan for the future, and frankly, the coalition government had no plan for the future. The Albanese Labor government is cleaning up this mess. Following the member for Hughes's political theatre metaphor, let's reflect on that: act 1, failure of the coalition to balance the budget; act 2, failure to create a single energy policy despite there being over 30 attempts to create a plan and not one effective policy to show for it. Act three: a failure to get wages moving again, and, instead, suggesting that low wage growth is a deliberate design feature of our economic architecture. You'd think the acts would end at the election of the Albanese Labor government, but there's an act four: the failure of the coalition opposition to even hold the seat of Aston. You have to credit their optimism, though. Before racking up $894 billion of debt, they bought themselves these mugs saying, 'back in black'. They're the masters of theatrics but not of substance—as Paul Keating would say, 'All tip, no iceberg,' or as Kathleen Studdert from Professionals Australia said, 'All mug and no coffee.' It's no surprise that when we look around the mainland of this country that it's wall-to-wall Labor governments, because when it comes to action on the cost of living, Australians cannot trust Liberals. Debt and financial mismanagement is part of the Liberals' DNA. In WA, the powerhouse of our economy, we saw a boom squandered and our AAA credit rating lost by the Barnett Liberal government. But, of course, we've seen these characteristics in the previous coalition government. We saw not one or two billion but $13 billion worth of JobKeeper payments go to companies that increased their sales between April and September 2021. This happened without a single thought on whether they should pay this back, and, meanwhile, instead, we had debt collectors relentlessly pursuing individuals for $32 million in JobKeeper for overpayments. Meanwhile, Labor is wanting to have targeted cost-of-living relief, and we're being careful to make sure that we don't feed the inflation dragon. I'll talk to what the Albanese Labor government is doing to help the people of Australia. In my electorate of Swan, we saw $442,439 put back into the pocket of those with prescriptions, thanks to our cheaper medicine policy. Tonight in the budget we will deliver further savings to households when it comes to hundreds of medicines. The Albanese Labor Government is easing the cost-of-living pressures for millions of Australians by allowing them to buy two months of eligible medicines for the price of a single prescription. Concession cardholders could save up to $43.80 a year per medicine, while others could save up to $180. Our cheaper child care will benefit 1.2 million families from 1 July. We know that this will help ease the financial stress for families across the country, and 96 per cent of families will be better off financially through our increases to the childcare rebate. We're getting wages moving again. Australians on minimum wage received a 5.1 per cent pay rise at the outset of the Albanese Labor government. I know that some weren't prepared to support our lowest paid workers' pay increase of $1 an hour. Those on minimum wage have played important roles during the pandemic. The Albanese Labor government supports aged-care workers. Last week the Minister for Aged Care announced an $11.3 billion package to deliver a 15 per cent pay increase to the award wage for aged-care workers. We're doing this because our aged-care workers deserved reward and recognition, for the important, invaluable role that they play in our community. We're working on the job of helping Australia. 16:43 Mr WOLAHAN 235654 Menzies Before I begin, can I congratulate those opposite, and the new member for Aston, Mary Doyle, on getting elected. That is a significant achievement for her, her campaign team and the Labor Party. But, all of that said, I have been in this parliament for not even a year, but I have been an observer of politics long enough to remember when commentators were talking about wall-to-wall Liberal governments and what that meant. I remember how fleeting that can be, because to be in power, at a state or a federal level, is the gift of the Australian people, and you have to earn that, not only on the day of the election but also on every day after. There is no doubt, for those who will compare notes on the Aston by-election, cost of living was one of top issues. There will be an analysis of what happened—my party will do one and your party will do one, I'm sure—but it's clear that the people of Melbourne and, probably, the people of Australia, are giving you a chance. They're giving you a chance to solve their problems. When they give you a chance, for them, it's really giving you a second chance, because when you look at the promises that were made before the last election, those promises have been broken. You've heard those promises many times over: the several references to $275; the claims of real, lasting plans for cheaper electricity and cheaper mortgages and that Australia would be better off under a Labor government. So you're being given a second chance, and, when you're given a second chance, I say, 'Don't waste it,' because I don't think Australians will give you a third chance. This is it—this is your second chance. Tonight the Treasurer has one job and it's to reduce inflation. The reason that that's his most important job is that, at the moment, all that work is being done by the Reserve Bank of Australia—all of it. We can have a tit-for-tat about who is to blame: the previous government, or the last 12 months? And the truth is: it's a bit of both. It has to be a bit of both—it would be unreasonable to say otherwise. But what you do is on you, and what you do can't be to leave it all to the Reserve Bank. There has to be a role for fiscal policy, because, when we think back to the latest, or the last, increase by the RBA, that was devastating for Australian families because it caught them off guard. They weren't expecting it. The professionals weren't expecting it. We saw it in how the market reacted. We saw it in how all of the commentators and all of the media, who are professionals at this, didn't expect it. One of the reasons it happened was that the RBA was addressing something that the government should have been assisting with, and that is core inflation. You can brag about where Australia ranks in inflation around the world, but core inflation—which excludes some of the variable items, of food and resources, which go up and down on a more variable rate—is the inflation that is 'sticky', that lasts longer and that affects people more. When the RBA saw core inflation being higher here than in any G7 country, then what you were doing, as to fiscal policy, wasn't working, and the RBA had to do it. You may call it a cliche to say it's having one foot on the accelerator and one foot on the brake, but it is the most simple metaphor for what's happening. We need fiscal policy. We need the government to be working in tandem with our monetary policy, not counter to it. Today in question time we saw a lot of hubris. We saw a lot of chanting. The responses of 'Why?' were repeated with great enthusiasm today. And we heard the same cliches again, of having inherited a trillion dollars of debt—said to be 'Liberal debt', even though half of that was inherited from the previous Labor government. And let's just forget that we had a pandemic! Let's forget about that, and let's forget that there were actual responses to that, which included your support of the pandemic debt. That's just conveniently forgotten. So, yes, debt is a massive problem. And guess what? There is a bipartisan element to that debt. But it is dishonest to ignore the pandemic and the important decisions that were made by the previous government and your support of those. In fact, you didn't just support them; you asked for them to be extended. Debt would be even higher if you actually had been sitting over there during the pandemic. So you have been given a second chance. I say: the Treasurer, tonight, shouldn't waste it, because you won't get a third. 16:48 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills Tonight, the Albanese Labor government is going to deliver the first budget surplus of an Australian government in 15 years. I hope I haven't given anything away, but I think everyone knows! That is remarkable. This is the first surplus since the global financial crisis. It is such an achievement—a significant achievement for the Albanese government in its first year. But, more than that, we are doing this while still delivering targeted relief to assist Australians with the pressures of the cost of living, because we know that the cost of living is front of mind for so many Australians right now. Unlike that mob over there, we are focused on relieving the pressure on Australians doing it tough, because responsible economic management is about investing in our economy and our people. It's about providing sensible, targeted relief whilst making investments that set Australia up for the future. So that's a bit of a contrast to those on the opposition benches. I've seen the shadow Treasurer, Angus Taylor, doing the rounds this morning with a number of pithy, albeit pathetic, one-liners. He said, 'A drover's dog could deliver a surplus.' That was his line! Well, what does that say for the opposition? Nine years of the previous Liberal government and they were unable to deliver a single one, but he says a drover's dog could deliver it. The poor drover's dog. He gives it a bad name. We should probably replace the Dog on the Tuckerbox on the road to Gundagai with a statue of Angus Taylor. In all his regal, imperious attire, he could be up there on the tuckerbox. It is remarkable that they are making that argument. It's a pathetic argument. In nine years they couldn't deliver one surplus, and we've done it in the first year. They are led now by a leader of the opposition who, as health minister—let's not forget—tried to tax Australians $7 every time they visited a GP, tried to raise the price of every script by $5 and froze the Medicare rebate. That's the reverse of relief on the cost of living; it's the exact reverse of what you should be doing. Is it any surprise he was voted the worst health minister in living memory by Australian doctors? Let's not just criticise. The government is helping so many Australians doing it tough. It's doing a lot, so let's talk about the positives. We've already delivered cheaper medicines, cutting the maximum co-payment for general patients from $42.50 to $30. This is going to save someone taking a single medicine up to $150 a year. We've reduced the cost for pensioners and concession cardholders so they will pay no more than $5 a week for all their medicine needs, no matter how many medicines they take. In September we cut the price of more than 2,000 brands of medicine, delivering $130 million back into the pockets of hardworking Australians. And tonight in the budget we will deliver—and you'll hear all about it—further savings to households when it comes to hundreds of medicines. For six million Australians we'll halve their medicine costs, reducing their need to visit the GP and the pharmacist, with $1.6 billion going back into their pockets over the next four years. These are sensible, targeted, measured relief measures that will make a real difference to Australians. Also, when it comes to wages, the government is supporting wage rises for underpaid Australians. We know the best support for Australians struggling with the cost of living is a wage increase. These are wage increases they certainly missed out on under the previous government, who said, in their own words, that wage suppression was a deliberate feature of their economic policy. The Albanese government and the budget will deliver a 15 per cent increase in the minimum wage for many aged-care workers across Australia. The Minister for Aged Care is here, and I note all the work she has done on behalf of the government to make this happen. This is the biggest pay rise for the sector ever. It's never been this big. That is so significant for so many people. A registered nurse could earn up to $196 a week extra or up to $10,000 a year more. It will help address the injustice of underpayment for our nurses and for our aged-care workers, and it will help them with the cost of living. It's practical and it's real. We've also addressed housing. Unfortunately, those on the opposite side and some on the crossbenches are opposing the Housing Australia Future Fund. It is crazy that they are doing that. This is about providing what is most important to Australians: a roof over their heads. And we'll hear about support for rental housing in the budget tonight. In conclusion, I've just got to say we are committed to delivering real relief which will ease the cost of living for so many Australians—millions around this country. The DEPUTY SPEAKER DZY This discussion has now concluded. COMMITTEES 51 COMMITTEES Human Rights Joint Committee 51 Report 51 16:53 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights, I present the committee's report entitled Human rights scrutiny report: Report 5 of 2023. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). Mr BURNS 278522 by leave—I'm pleased to present the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights fifth scrutiny report of 2023. In this report, the committee has considered 29 new bills and 172 new legislative instruments and has commented on six of these bills and one legislative instrument. Two of the bills the committee has commented on do not raise human rights concerns. Rather, the committee has chosen to comment on these bills to explain why they appear to be compatible with human rights. This is important, especially on the first bill that I am going to talk about. As part of the Voice debate, there have been a lot of reasons and debating points put forward as to why the 'no' campaign should prevail, and one of those false points has been around the rights of those being activated by an institution such as the Voice. The committee has inquired, and, as per the excellent advice that we have received from human rights experts and lawyers, any claim that one group would be disadvantaged or discriminated against by the Voice is unfounded; it has no substance, and I'm going to talk about that right now. The committee has commented on the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) Bill 2023. The committee considers this bill promotes the right to take part in public affairs by facilitating the holding of a referendum. The committee also considers that if a voice to parliament were established, this would promote the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to participate in public affairs, the right to self-determination and the right to equality and nondiscrimination and is therefore compatible with human rights. In relation to the right to equality and nondiscrimination of non-Indigenous Australians, the committee notes that the bill is aimed at achieving the legitimate objective of realising the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and would not negatively affect the ability of other people to enjoy or exercise their rights and freedoms. Let me say that again: the bill is aimed at achieving the legitimate objective of realising the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and would not negatively affect the ability of other people to enjoy or exercise their rights and freedoms. The committee therefore considers the bill to be compatible with the right to equality and nondiscrimination. The committee has also commented on the Family Law Amendment Bill, which seeks to make numerous amendments to the family law system. The committee notes that several measures contained in the bill would promote human rights, particularly the rights of the child, culture, and equality and nondiscrimination. There are, however, also some measures that would limit certain rights. The committee considers these limitations would be permissible as a matter of international human rights law. In this report, the committee has also conducted its consideration of three matters raised previously. In particular, the committee has considered the Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Income Management Reform) Bill 2023 and two related legislative instruments, which seek to extend all measures relating to income management and to the enhanced income management regime. The committee considers that providing participants with access to a bank account and associated debit card that offers superior technology and improved banking functions would be a positive measure. However, for many years the committee has raised human rights concerns regarding mandatory income management. Noting the inadequate safeguards and insufficient flexibility to consider individual circumstances, the committee considers this legislation does risk limiting the rights to social security, privacy, equality and nondiscrimination, and the rights of the child. The committee also thanks the minister for her engagement with the committee on this matter. Finally, the committee has concluded its consideration of the Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment for Disability Support Pension) Determination 2023. This instrument sets out the rules for assessing whether a person meets work-related impairment levels for assessing eligibility for the disability support pension. The committee has raised concerns about the compatibility of this tool with the rights to equality and nondiscrimination, social security and adequate standard of living for those who are not eligible for the DSP and draws these concerns to the attention of the parliament. With these comments, I once again, on behalf of the committee members, thank the hardworking staff of our committee; they are first-class public servants. I commend the committee's Human rights scrutiny report 5 of 2023 to the House. Petitions Committee 52 Report 52 16:58 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie I present report No. 9 of the Standing Committee on Petitions for the 47th Parliament. The report read as follows— HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES PETITIONS COMMITTEE REPORT No. 9 Petitions and Ministerial Responses 9 May 2023 MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE Chair Ms Susan Templeman MP Deputy Chair Mr Ross Vasta MP Mr Sam Birrell MP Ms Alison Byrnes MP Ms Lisa Chesters MP Mr Garth Hamilton MP Ms Tracy Roberts MP Ms Meryl Swanson MP Report summarising the petitions and ministerial responses being presented. The committee met in private session in the 47th Parliament on 8 March 2023, 22 M arch 2023, 29 March 2023 and 12 April 2023. 1. The committee resolved to present the following 55 petitions in accordance with standing order 207: Petitions certified on 8 March 2023 From 161 petitioners—requesting Just terms compensation for the Noongar people of Western Australia. (EN4808) From 132 petitioners—requesting Ban mRNA vaccines. (EN4810) From 20 petitioners—requesting Cancel the referendum for indigenous Voice to Parliament (EN4819) From 11 petitioners—requesting Control inflation with compulsory savings (EN4822) From 91 petitioners—requesting Independent review into the Australian Broadcasting Corporation for media bias (EN4823) From 254 petitioners—requesting Turkish Family Scheme visa (EN4824) From 52 petitioners—requesting Trove is an essential source for researching all historical data. (EN4825) From 1507 petitioners—requesting Parliamentary inquiry into the wind turbine industry in Australia (EN4826) From 3056 petitioners—requesting Australia's Heritage Brumbies Deserve Recognition and protection in Commonwealth Legislation (EN4827) From 218 petitioners—requesting Amend Social Security law to include Nurse Practitioners (EN4834) From 270 petitioners—requesting Reduce the Retirement Age for Aboriginal people in Australia. (EN4835) From 21 petitioners—requesting Outlaw hidden charges (EN4838) From 13 petitioners—requesting Improve rights of employees when made redundant after November 1st (EN4839) From 7645 petitioners—requesting Unrestricted work rights for students (EN4842) From 14 petitioners—requesting Medicare Coverage for Foreign Aged Parents in Australia (EN4843) From 279 petitioners—requesting Medicare improve access to bulk billing GP's (EN4849) From 3875 petitioners—requesting Support Current Victorian Nursing and Midwifery students (EN4851) From 19 petitioners—requesting Withdraw Triple J Sponsorship of the Groovin' the Moo festival (EN4854) From 14 petitioners—requesting National testing for dioxins in Australia. (EN4856) From 417 petitioners—requesting Permanent residency pathway for family members on long-term bridging visas (EN4857) From 32 petitioners—requesting PCR tests—change back to no referral required (EN4859) From 15 petitioners—requesting Add jab data to the next Australian census. (EN4862) From 3261 petitioners—requesting Allowing asylum for individuals with non-conforming in traditional gender identities (EN4863) From 43 petitioners—requesting Including onboarding and psych-evaluations to the NDIS worker screening checks(EN4870) From 138 petitioners—requesting Improve access to Medicare for telehealth consultations with General Practitioners (EN4872) From 31161 petitioners—requesting Bereavement suite or room in every hospital in Australia (EN4873) Petitions certified on 22 March 2023 From 12 petitioners—requesting Subsidise EV Conversions (EN4880) From 27 petitioners—requesting Keep Fiasp (ultra-fast acting) Insulin on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (EN4886) From 9 petitioners—requesting Revoke Pauga Extraditable Person notice since Samoan Arrest warrant withdrawn (EN4889) From 45 petitioners—requesting Royal Commission into Murdoch media empire (EN4891) From 10 petitioners—requesting 1000Mbit to our 12Mbit? Country internet speeds are not equitable! (EN4892) From 10 petitioners—requesting Sponsored Tourist visa facilitation for Lebanese (EN4895) From 10729 petitioners—requesting Stop the partner income assesment for the Disability Support Pension. (EN4899) From 3 petitioners—requesting Prepare for war with China. (EN4903) From 231 petitioners—requesting Increase the medicare rebate and financial support to GP practices (EN4906) From 766 petitioners—requesting Give Lactation Consultants a Medicare Provider Number (EN4909) From 603 petitioners—requesting Implement a Commonwealth Harassment Act (EN4913) From 6 petitioners—requesting Reject a National Human Rights Act (EN4914) From 8 petitioners—requesting Batteries in every home to cut the costs of electricity. (EN4917) From 27 petitioners—requesting Stop the cancellation of Single Parenting Payment (EN4919) From 15 petitioners—requesting Cessation of alliance with the USA due to extremist views. (EN4926) From 18 petitioners—requesting Encourage Peace Talks between Ukraine and Russia (EN4928) From 34 petitioners—requesting Legislation to prevent telecommunication companies forcing direct debit upon consumers (EN4939) From 376 petitioners—requesting Pakistan Is Under Facism: Australia Must Act. (EN4942) Petitions certified on 29 March 2023 From 57 petitioners—requesting VC Medal awarded to Leading Seaman Ronald Taylor 20863 (EN4948) From 19 petitioners—requesting Ban executives from failed banks, from running another one. (EN4951) From 73 petitioners—requesting Democracy in Pakistan (EN4954) From 1 petitioners—requesting UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFIT TO BE INDEX ONLY EVERRY 2 YEARS! (EN4958) From 248 petitioners—requesting Free Mental Health Care in Australia (EN4960) From 42 petitioners—requesting Failed outcomes of Australia's development partnership with Sri Lanka (EN4961) From 6 petitioners—requesting Filming in public (EN4966) From 39 petitioners—requesting Climate action: everything, everywhere, all at once. (EN4967) From 77 petitioners—requesting Stop Companies Keeping Unnecessary Data—Protect Consumers' Privacy (EN4968) From 5 petitioners—requesting Free tubal ligation for willing and dumb/ crazy women (EN4969) Petition certified on 12 April 2023 From 16 petitioners—requesting support for Trove (PN0557) 2. The following 31 ministerial responses to petitions were received: Ministerial responses received by the Committee on 29 March 2023 From the Treasurer to a petition requesting the repatriation of the Reserve Bank of Australia's (RBA) gold holdings held at the Bank of England (BoE) (EN4029) From the Minister for Finance to petitions regarding digital identity legislation (EN4090 and EN4588) From the Treasurer to a petition requesting the repatriation of the Reserve Bank of Australia's (RBA) gold holdings held at the Bank of England (BoE) (EN4096) From the Minister for Home Affairs to a petition regarding the stay period for Temporary Graduate (subclass 485) visa (TGV) holders who remained in Australia during the VOCID-19 pandemic (EN4340) From the Minister for Foreign Affairs to a petition regarding the conflict in Tigray, northern Ethiopia (EN4491) From the Treasurer to a petition requesting to replace the Queen's portrait on the $5 banknote with an image of the National War Memorial (EN4543) From the Minister for Health and Aged Care to a petition requesting to revoke protection for companies responsible for supplying COVID-19 vaccines to the Commonwealth (EN4610) From the Minister for Housing to a petition requesting a Royal Commission into housing and homelessness in Australia (EN4753) Ministerial responses received by the Committee on 12 April 2023 From the Minister for Communications to a petition regarding reporting by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) on a range of issues (EN3540) From the Treasurer to a petition regarding the Medicare Levy (EN3543) From the Minister for Communications to a petition requesting the Government privatise the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) and the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS) (EN3554) From the Minister for Communications to a petition regarding reporting by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) on allegations of war crimes made against the 2nd Commando Regiment's November platoon (EN3637) From the Minister for Communications to a petition requesting the prevention of the United Australia Party from sending text messages (EN3665) From the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to a petition regarding the cancellation of Mr Novak Djokovic's visa based on character ground (EN3861) From the Minister for Foreign Affairs to a petition requesting to include Ukraine into the Australian Generalized System of Tariff Preferences (EN4280) From the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government to a petition regarding accountability of Australian airlines (EN4362) From the Minister for Communications to a petition regarding federal legislation for production and distribution of adult media (EN4527) From the Attorney-General to a petition regarding Google's indexing of personal information (EN4573) From the Minister for Trade and Tourism to a petition requesting the creation of "The Defund Davos Act" (EN4591) From the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to a petition regarding Australia's treatment of asylum seekers (EN4601) From the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs to a petition regarding the urgent prioritisation of Iranian visa applicants (EN4602) From the Minister for Defence to a petition regarding nuclear-capable B-52 bombers, AUKUS and Marine Rotational Forces in Darwin (EN4647) From the Minister for Health and Aged Care to a petition requesting to recognise pharmacists as valid healthcare providers and prescribers (EN4656) From the Attorney-General to a petition requesting Australia Enact privacy laws similar to the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR) (EN4667) From the Minister for Foreign Affairs to a petition requesting the Australian Government to take stronger action against the Iranian regime to stop the execution of protestors (EN4682) From the Minister for Housing to a petition regarding the use of cruise ships to assist with the housing crisis (EN4686) From the Minister for Health and Aged Care to a petition requesting enhanced COVID-19 requirements or restrictions for travellers from the People's Republic of China, including the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau (EN4722, EN4726, EN4728, EN4731) From the Minister for Health and Aged Care to a petition regarding access of Schedule 8 medicines for chronic pain sufferers (EN4725) From the Minister for Health and Aged Care to a petition requesting the removal of restrictions on travellers from the People's Republic of China (EN4732) From the Minister for the Arts to a petition regarding funding for Trove (EN4737, EN4745, EN4747, EN4755, EN4761) From the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister to a petition requesting to change the date of Australia Day (EN4773) Ms Susan Templeman MP Chair—Petitions Committee PETITIONS 54 PETITIONS Presentation 54 16:58 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie by leave—I present the following 55 petitions: Native Title: Western Australia 54 Vaccination 55 Australian Constitution: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice 55 Superannuation 55 Australian Broadcasting Corporation 55 Refugee and Humanitarian Visas 56 National Library of Australia: Trove 56 Renewable Energy 56 Feral Animal Management: Horses 56 Disability Support Pension 57 First Nations Australians: Retirement 57 Consumer Law 57 Workplace Relations 57 International Students 58 Medicare 58 Medicare 58 Universities: Nursing and Midwifery Training Placements 58 Groovin the Moo 59 Environment 59 Migration 59 COVID-19: Testing 59 COVID-19: Vaccination 60 Gender and Sexual Orientation 60 National Disability Insurance Scheme 60 Medicare 60 Hospitals: Perinatal Bereavement Suites 61 Electric Vehicles 61 Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 61 Pauga, Mr Talalelei 61 Media 62 National Broadband Network 62 Visitor Visas 62 Disability Support Pension 62 Defence Personnel 62 General Practitioners 62 Medicare 63 Cybersafety 63 Human Rights 63 Energy 63 Pensions and Benefits 64 International Relations: Australia and the United States of America 64 Ukraine 64 Telecommunications 64 Pakistan 64 Taylor, Leading Seaman Ronald (Buck) 65 Banking and Financial Services 65 Pakistan 65 Pensions and Benefits 65 Mental Health 66 Sri Lanka 66 Personal Information and Privacy 66 Climate Change 66 Cybercrime 66 Health Care: Family Planning 67 National Library of Australia: Trove 67 PETITIONS 67 PETITIONS Responses 67 16:58 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie I present the following 31 ministerial responses to petitions previously presented: Gold Holdings 67 Personal Information And Privacy 67 Gold Holdings 68 Temporary Graduate Visas 68 Tigray 69 Australian Currency 69 Vaccination 70 Housing 70 Media 71 Medicare 71 Media 72 Australian Defence Force 72 Electoral Communications 72 COVID-19: International Travel 73 Ukraine 73 Aviation Industry: Consumer Protection 73 Arts And Culture: Adult Content 74 Personal Information and Privacy 74 World Economic Forum 75 Asylum Seekers 75 Iran: Migration 76 Defence 76 Health Care: Pharmacists 77 Cybersecurity 77 Human Rights: Iran 78 Housing 78 COVID-19: Biosecurity 79 Health Care 79 COVID-19: Biosecurity 80 National Library Of Australia: Trove 81 Australia Day 81 PETITIONS 81 PETITIONS Statements 81 16:59 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie by leave—Mr Speaker, as you know, there is a dedicated time for the presentation of petitions and ministers' responses to petitions every sitting Monday. In fact, after the acknowledgement of country and prayers, the presentation of petitions is the very first item of business in the sitting week—emphasising the importance of petitions as a way for Australian citizens and residents to directly make a request of the House of Representatives. When the House doesn't meet on a Monday of a sitting week, petitions are not usually presented by the Petitions Committee. I note that individual members may also present petitions on behalf of their constituents. But given that the House has not met for several weeks, the Petitions Committee agreed to seek leave to present petitions and ministers' responses at a different time than usual. Today, I present 55 petitions and 31 ministerial responses to petitions previously presented. Importantly, this presentation allows for the petitions to be referred to the relevant minister for a response without undue delay, and for the ministerial responses to be provided to the petitioners and published on the parliamentary website. I thank the House. BILLS 81 BILLS Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 81

Family Law Amendment Bill 2023

Second Reading 81 17:00 Mr WOOD E0F La Trobe I am in continuation. I was speaking about schedule 4, headed 'Independent children's lawyers'. Schedule 4 of the Family Law Amendment Bill 2023 deals with independent children's lawyers and would establish a requirement to meet with children over the age of five unless there are exceptional circumstances. However, as with other parts of this bill, it must be road tested. How will it affect the work of independent children's lawyers in remote and rural areas? How does a child communicate that they do not want to meet? Does that need to come through a parent? These are significant practical real-world issues. Schedule 5 of the bill is headed 'Case management and procedure'. Among other things, schedule 5 introduces new harmful proceedings orders to prevent a vexatious litigant from filling and serving new applications without first obtaining leave from the court. It also includes a new overarching purpose for the family practice and procedure provisions. As with other parts of the bill, while the intent is sound as a matter of principle, the measures warrant examination. For example, while we welcome clarifying that family law procedures should promote safety, the Law Council rightly argues that family law should aim to minimise acrimony. Schedule 6 of the bill is headed 'Communications of details of family law proceedings'. Schedule 6 of the bill redrafts section 121 of the Family Law Act to clarify restrictions around public communication of family law proceedings. This is a redrafting of provisions that prevent people from publishing the details of family law proceedings. As with other parts of the bill, there are questions worth exploring: for example, is it appropriate for the bill to protect professional expert witnesses? Schedule 7 of the bill is headed 'Family report writers'. Schedule 7 deals with family report writers. The most notable part of the schedule is the suggestion that the government could set mandatory standards and requirements in regulations. The importance of consistency in standards of practice is rightly acknowledged, but, as the Law Council and others have pointed out, it is unclear what the practical implications will be. Schedule 8 of the bill is headed 'Review of operation of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Act 2021'. Schedule 8 is a surprise last-minute amendment on which the government chose not to consult. It brings forward the date for the review of the merger of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia and the Family Court of Australia by two years. Instead of giving the Federal Circuit and Family Court a reasonable period to bed down the merger, the Attorney has, unannounced, chosen to bring the review date forward by two years, to the end of this parliamentary term. One would be forgiven for thinking this is a cynical attempt by the Attorney-General to leave open the doorway to relitigate the merger of the courts as an election issue in 2025. We reject that type of optimism. Changes to family law systems should aim to reduce the pain, costs and time associated with separation. It should not be a place of political pride. Schedule 9 of the bill is headed 'Dual appointments'. Schedule 9 deals with dual appointments to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia and the Family Court of Western Australia. In conclusion, the coalition agrees with the intent behind many of the measures in this bill, but the bill is not yet in a position where the coalition can support it. The problems are well recognised, but we are concerned that the solutions have not adequately been tested or will go further than is needed. These are not the sorts of changes that warrant simply being waved through. We will support the bill going to a committee for careful scrutiny. Ideally, the committee hearing would have already happened before the second reading debate. We should already have heard, for example, from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities about how the measures in this bill will affect them on the ground before the bill is debated in this place. It's a shame that the government has chosen to progress the bill in this way. This bill warrants a very careful and public examination through a parliamentary inquiry so Australians can develop an informed view on whether the changes in this bill do what they are intended to do. The coalition will settle its final position on the bill in light of those public hearings and committee evidence. Debate adjourned. Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023 82

Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023

Second Reading 82 17:04 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I rise to speak on the Family Law Amendment (Information Sharing) Bill 2023. The coalition welcomes this bill. It is the culmination of work started under the former coalition government to ensure that family courts have the information they need when making orders in parenting matters. The coalition has a strong record when it comes to improving interaction between the child protection and family law systems. In the 2019-20 budget, funding was provided to co-locate state and territory family safety officials in family law courts to improve information sharing between the family law, family violence and child protection systems. After the Australian Law Reform Commission handed down its report Family law for the future, the coalition agreed with the recommendation that there should be a national information-sharing framework implemented. The framework that came out of the Australian Law Reform Commission report was intended to guide the sharing of information about the safety, welfare and wellbeing of families and children between the family law, family violence and child protection systems. That work progressed in partnership with all jurisdictions through the Council of Attorneys-General and its successor bodies. In November 2021, it resulted in the endorsement by Commonwealth, state and territory governments of the National Strategic Framework for Information Sharing between the Family Law and Family Violence and Child Protection Systems. The objective of the national framework was very clear: The objective of the National Framework is to promote the safety and wellbeing of adults and children affected by family violence, child abuse and neglect, and support informed and appropriate decision-making in circumstances where there is, or may be, a risk of family violence, child abuse or neglect. One of the features of the national framework was a shift away from subpoenas issued by the parties to a family law dispute. Instead, the framework moved towards targeted requests for information and court initiated orders. Rather than relying on parties to issue subpoenas, the framework was intended to empower courts to access family safety information. To facilitate early and streamlined information sharing, it proposed a new form of order, referred to as a short-form order, to ascertain whether a state or territory agency holds information that would inform decision-making and to give an indication of the nature and extent of the risk or records held as well as the involvement of the respondent agency. Importantly, the national framework, which was endorsed in November 2021, envisaged a broad range of state and territory agencies would be information-sharing agencies. It expressly included state and territory child protection or child welfare departments and state and territory policing agencies and firearms registries, but it also envisaged flexibility to include other bodies in the future. This could see the inclusion of state and territory corrections or youth justice bodies and even non-government organisations, such as specialist family violence services, participating in the scheme. This was intended to give effect to the principle that if an individual's safety is a concern in a matter before a court all relevant information should be before that court to ensure decision-making is fully informed. The coalition is pleased to see that those factors are reflected in this bill. This bill achieves four main things. First, it introduces two different types of information-sharing orders: both a short-form order, which is called an order for particulars, and an order to produce those documents or information. These provisions replace the existing, more limited information-sharing provision in the Family Law Act. Second, the bill allows the family law courts to obtain a broader range of information than is possible under existing information-sharing arrangements. This recognises that family violence and child abuse and neglect are complex, can take a number of different forms and can impact children even if not directed at them. Family courts should not be unduly limited in the information they take into account when making parenting orders. Third, it expressly outlines legal exclusions to information sharing, such as documents that are privileged or information that would endanger a person if disclosed. Fourth, it restricts the issue of subpoenas without leave of the court. In circumstances where an information-sharing order requiring the production of documents has already been made, the bill says that a party can only issue a subpoena with leave. This is intended to reduce duplication of information requests and avoid the cost and time associated with subpoena processes. The bill will rely heavily on regulations firstly to prescribe state and territory bodies as information-sharing agencies that can be directed to produce information and secondly to create rules around the production, storage, disclosure and disposal of information. This is in line with the approach envisaged by the national framework. The bill also establishes a requirement to conduct a statutory review within 12 months after the commencement of the scheme. We know that far too many family law disputes involve family violence, and this, of course, can have a devastating and long-term impact. We also know that situations can change quickly while a family law matter is progressing through the courts. The information that was put before the court six months ago might not be the information the court needs to make the best possible orders today. A joined-up approach between the family law, family violence and child protection systems is one way to combat this situation, and this bill is a welcome development. I commend the bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2023 83

Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2023

Second Reading 83 17:12 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I rise to speak on the Crimes and Other Legislation Amendment (Omnibus) Bill 2023. The coalition is supportive of the intent of this bill. It is, however, ironic, given that this bill makes changes to a range of Commonwealth statutes that relate to law enforcement, oversight and related judicial processes, that the scrutiny processes around the bill itself have been less than satisfactory. This bill should have been referred in its entirety to the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, the PJCIS, for scrutiny. It remains unclear why this did not happen. Instead, only a single technical provision of the bill relating to a change in the name of the South Australian Independent Commission Against Corruption was referred to the PJCIS. Understandably, the PJCIS declined to conduct an inquiry into an inconsequential amendment. It now seems that at the eleventh hour the government has realised its error and, at the urging of the coalition, will subject this bill to further scrutiny. It is important that such a process of scrutiny is conducted because, while much of the bill is procedural, we are dealing with important and complicated matters relating to national security and criminal law, and there are some substantive changes. Any time that proposed legislation touches on such pieces of legislation as the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act or the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act, as this bill does, it should be subject to careful scrutiny from a parliamentary committee such as the PJCIS to examine how the proposed changes will work in practice. Changes to legislation in these areas are too important not to put them through an appropriate process of scrutiny to understand any issues which may arise. The only way to do this is to hear from the agencies likely to be affected by the legislation. None of us, I'm sure, would want to see any unintended consequences baked into these acts. The Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act allows eligible judges or nominated members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to issue warrants, orders and approvals to use certain covert or coercive investigative powers. To provide oversight to this process, the governments of Victoria and Queensland have established public interest monitors, who can appear at hearings of applications for warrants and essentially act as a contradictor. The current legislation, however, prevents those public interest monitors from making submissions in relation to what are called part 5.3 supervisory orders—these are control orders, extended supervision orders and interim supervision orders—issued under part 5.3 of the Criminal Code, including orders being issued in relation to matters concerning terrorist offenders. The provisions in schedule 8 of this bill before the House will allow the public interest monitors in Victoria and Queensland to make submissions relating to part 5.3 supervisory orders. On the information available to the coalition it is unclear what impact, if any, this would have on those regimes. Of course, that would be an appropriate matter for a parliamentary committee to consider. The bill before the House will also amend the Anti‑Money Laundering and Counter‑Terrorism Financing Act to close a loophole relating to the obligation imposed on reporting entities to register with AUSTRAC. Currently that obligation can only be enforced if AUSTRAC becomes aware of the failure to register within 12 months of the contravention. In addition, the amendments in schedule 1 will clarify that sensitive AUSTRAC information that is shared with partner agencies cannot then be produced to courts and tribunals by those agencies. Finally, the amendments in schedule 1 will authorise the AUSTRAC chief executive officer to use computer programs, including automated programs, to take non-adverse administrative actions, such as registration renewals. Explanatory materials note the need for sophisticated internal business rules and quality assurance and refer to 'high-risk' decisions. It is again unclear what new risks, if any, would result from these changes, noting that the stated intention is to create efficiencies for AUSTRAC and for regulated entities. Again these provisions would benefit from the scrutiny that a parliamentary committee could provide. Amendments to the Foreign Evidence Act in schedule 5 of the bill will mean that foreign evidence is no longer required to be certified by a 'judge, magistrate or officer' of the relevant country. Instead, the new provisions will provide that testimony can also be signed or certified by 'a person authorised to administer an oath or affirmation or put a person under an obligation to tell the truth' in or of the foreign country to which the request was made. The effect of this change will be that foreign evidence will be admissible in a wider range of circumstances. Amendments proposed in schedule 6 of the bill will provide the Attorney-General with a discretionary power to refuse consent to a request or an application for transfer to or from Australia at an earlier stage in the process. This is intended to reduce procedural overheads associated with the international prisoner transfer process. Once again it would be appropriate for a parliamentary committee, such as the PJCIS, to scrutinise this proposed change. Changes in schedule 9 of the bill before the House will allow the commissioner to suspend a person's participation in the National Witness Protection Program in circumstances where the participant requests it or where the commissioner forms the view that the participant has done or intends to do something that would limit their ability to protect and assist the participant. As is the case with the other changes of which I have spoken, scrutiny of this proposed change by a parliamentary committee would be desirable. I repeat my earlier statement that the coalition are in agreement with the intent of the bill which is before the House. We will not oppose this bill, subject only to the evidence that comes out of a committee inquiry. I do state the principle that senators and members should not be asked to make changes to Australia's national security legislation or important parts of the Crimes Act without a full understanding of the impact of those changes. It is necessary and appropriate that members of this place and of the Senate are in a position to be fully informed about the effect of changes that would be made by legislation that we are asked to vote upon. It is for that reason that the coalition believes it is appropriate that the bill, in its totality, should be subject to review by a parliamentary committee, such as the PJCIS. I repeat that while the coalition is supportive of the intent of this bill, naturally we would consider the evidence that comes out of the appropriate parliamentary inquiry in finalising that position. Debate adjourned. Ordered that the resumption of the debate be made an order of the day for a later hour. Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support Measures) Bill 2023 85

Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support Measures) Bill 2023

Second Reading 85 17:20 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin The coalition will be supporting the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support Measures) Bill 2023. This bill works to improve debt recovery and help prevent future debts for low-income parents. It therefore will have the coalition's support. In fact, two of the measures in the bill are measures that were previously announced by the former coalition government as part of the 2021-22 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook that were not legislated prior to the last federal election. These coalition measures strengthen Australia's child support framework, and it is pleasing to see the current government recognise the hard work of the former minister in this area by legislating these very important reforms. The former coalition government committed $7.8 million to strengthening child support compliance activities, enabling child support debts to be recovered in a wider range of circumstances. This included allowing Services Australia to dock parents' pay to repay child support in more circumstances, including after a child turns 18, which overturns the existing loophole where it is effectively case closed once a child turns 18. At that point, there are limited ways to recover a debt. The former coalition government also worked to strengthen the departure prohibition order system, which prevents parents who fail to pay child support from leaving Australia. This is another measure within the bill before us today. The coalition government again worked to give Services Australia discretion in those circumstances to refuse an exemption if they have reason to believe the parent is likely to shirk their responsibilities and fail to pay back the remainder of the debt when they return to Australia. Under the coalition, since July 2017 5,394 parents were issued with a travel ban, enabling the recovery of nearly $100 million and ensuring to a greater extent the wellbeing and economic security of those children who were affected by the relevant family breakdown. It's expected that these changes will recover up to $164 million in debt owed to parents and their children. We understand that family breakdowns are incredibly difficult, so child support is in place to ensure that, no matter where or with whom they live, children that are affected by family breakdown remain to the greatest extent financially secure. We make no apologies for employing and indeed putting on the table these tough measures to ensure that child support is paid, because, again, parents who shirk their responsibilities are just depriving their own children of the financial support that will ultimately give them a better life. We recognise that most parents do the right thing and fulfil their child support obligations. Since its introduction in 1988, the government has transferred a remarkable $33 billion in child support payments. When parents don't pay their child support on time, we all know in this place that it has a real and material impact on the financial security of single parents and their children. These measures will therefore go some way to closing loopholes and providing Services Australia with additional capabilities to stop those seeking to shirk their responsibility and ultimately to provide for their children—to provide the support that they deserve and need. The coalition remains committed, just as we were when in government, to seeing parents and children receive the financial support they're entitled to. For that reason, we'll commend the government and commend and support this bill in this chamber and in the other place. 17:24 Ms THWAITES 282212 Jagajaga This bill, the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support Measures) Bill 2023, has the potential to make a really significant difference in the lives of children and families in all of our communities. It is positive to hear that those opposite support the bill, because I'm sure that many in this chamber have constituents who have come to them over the years frustrated and upset with the child support system, asking for our support for a way through. The truth is that we haven't seen a lot of reform in this area, so this reform is a positive step and a step in the right direction, and our government has signalled that there is more to come. We do know that every child support case is different. Everyone has a different set of circumstances. Of course, some people who pay or receive child support do so without encountering any issues. It is a really important system, set up to ensure the best interests of and the best futures for children. But it's those occasions when we know that the system hasn't worked or isn't working that tell us that we need to look at how we can make things better. When we heard the stories of parents who've suffered financial abuse, including through missing or misrepresented levels of child support payments, our government knew we had to make changes. Those of us in this place who have the opportunity to make these changes to improve the way these systems, which are so important in people's lives, work owe it to the people in our community, to their kids and in fact also to the people who administer these systems—all those people working at Services Australia—to help make the child support system in this country work as well as it can. I'm well aware that often there are not easy fixes for some of the issues encountered in this space, but it is really heartening to know that we have a minister and a government that aren't shying away from changes to the child support system that will help deliver fairer outcomes for separated families. This is important work. This bill will help improve the timely collection of child support owed to parents and help prevent future debt for low-income parents. We know child support is a big system. In the last financial year alone, $3.7 billion in child support payments was transferred between 1.3 million parents for 1.1 million children in Australia. In this bill, our government are proposing three key changes. We are expanding employer withholding, tightening the arrangements around departure prohibition orders and improving income accuracy for low-income parents. These represent the start of reforms of child support in this country that our government will deliver. As I've said, child support is a complex system; it has a lot of variability in it and, of course, people have variability in their circumstances. No one model is ever going to fit every family and their circumstances. So we can't promise that the changes being introduced will sort every issue or will make the change that every single family is looking for, but we do know this will make an important difference for many families. I, like many in this chamber, I'm sure, have had people in my community contact my office with a range of issues relating to child support. There are certainly some consistent themes that I can draw out from the contact. They include confusion about the way the system works, the structure of child support and the assistance that can be provided under that system. People have also pointed out to me the difficulty they find in getting the help they need when payments aren't coming through as expected. Consistency of payments is another concern, and I'm really pleased to see that one of the features of the bill we're debating today will help see child support paid on time, providing that certainty that we all know is so important in our lives and affects what budget a parent has to work with in any given week. We know there's more to be done beyond the changes being introduced in this bill. Our government is very much aware of the scale of the task to make the child support system work better. We know that many people who pay or receive child support do the right thing. As I said, in many cases the system works as it should. But, for the people it unfortunately doesn't work for, we need to make sure there are strict measures in place so that, wherever possible, parents and kids are getting the child support they're owed. We know for a fact that some parents deliberately avoid paying child support or deliberately misrepresent their earnings to avoid paying as much child support as they should. In many cases this kind of behaviour can be a form of financial control and abuse. It can be used against former partners and ultimately, of course, leaves children and the parents caring for them worse off, sometimes with some quite significant repercussions. From conversations I've had with some parents—and again I'm sure others have also had these conversations—I know it is particularly difficult for those who have left abusive partners and now find they're experiencing continued trauma as a result of child support being withheld. I do note the important work of the family law inquiry that was conducted in the 46th Parliament and brought renewed focus to these kinds of issues, as well as other relevant parliamentary inquiries that have highlighted how interwoven some of these issues are, including the family, domestic and sexual violence inquiry I was a member of in the previous parliament. We do know financial security is a serious problem in these areas and it disproportionally affects women. At the beginning of this year our government outlined in its response to the family law inquiry the work we'll be doing this year and beyond to improve the operations of the child support system in our country. We are strongly committed to seeing single parents and the children they are raising receive the financial support they are entitled to. That's what this system should do. We are mindful of making sure that Services Australia and other government services don't inadvertently make financial abuse or other forms of abuse worse, and we're reviewing compliance, collection and enforcement. That is in no way a reflection on the people who do this work. It is difficult work, and they do it well. What we're looking at are the structures and rules that support them to do this work. This year the government will establish a child support consultation group, a group providing important input on issues being faced by parents and families, as well as a child support expert panel, which will consider the child support formula and whether it can more accurately represent the costs parents face today in raising kids. We will also support an evaluation of separated families to see what more should be done to support parents in situations where private collection arrangements have broken down, and we'll commission research looking at the costs facing separated parents. All of this will help us continue to reform this very important system. In this bill there are, as I said, a number of significant changes. The first change in this bill is extending employer withholding, which is the default method of paying child support and is an effective way to collect support. Last financial year, employer withholding enabled the collection of $743 million in child support from 91,000 parents. The changes we're introducing in this bill will improve the active collection of child support debt in cases which have ended by extending the circumstances where Services Australia can deduct child support from a parent's wages. It will help to ensure that child support is paid on time, giving parents the financial resources they need to meet the week-to-week costs that come with raising their kids. Currently, employer withholding can only be initiated in active child support cases, cases where there is an ongoing obligation for child support. The bill before us fixes that. It enables Services Australia to use employer withholding to collect child support debts in any case, including those where the case has ended. An example of this might be where a case has been active and then, of course, a child turns 18 and the case ends. That scenario sounds reasonable, but, in fact, it means that in some cases the receiving parent is still owed a debt by the other parent, but they can't take any action, because there isn't an active child support case. What we have here is a sensible proposition that, even if the case has ended, there's still the debt and it should be paid. We estimate this will recover up to $154 million owed in unpaid child support from a pool of around 18,000 parents. With an average debt of nearly $11,000 owing to the receiving parent we can see how this will make a big difference to families' lives. The second change is tightening departure prohibition orders targeted at parents who deliberately and repeatedly avoid their child support obligations. Parents with a departure prohibition order will no longer be able to offer a refundable financial security like a bond to qualify for exemption, unless Services Australia is satisfied that they will make satisfactory arrangements to repay their child support debt within an appropriate period. This makes these rules clearer across families. It means if a parent returns to Australia they get that bond back, regardless of whether they repay the child support debt they're meant to. Under the current system, if the parent owing child support is someone of reasonably good financial means and can provide a bond, they can travel overseas while continuing to actively avoid their legal obligations to pay that child support, meaning that those children miss out. In this case, we are closing down a loophole that should be shut down. Parents who owe child support shouldn't be able to exploit a pathway like this to avoid paying up. The changes will enable Services Australia to refuse an exemption to allow overseas travel even if someone has a bond or other form of financial security to offer. On this measure, the data tells us there is a smaller number of families involved—about 110 parents are in this situation—but it's worth highlighting this small group of parents each have quite a substantial debt pool, averaging $43,500 each. The third change is on improving income accuracy for around 150,000 low-income parents. This will help prevent debts in circumstances where low-income parents on income support are not required to lodge a tax return. The change will allow Services Australia to deem the parent's adjustable taxable income to be equal to the self-support amount. We sometimes see at the moment inaccurate income estimates putting parents on lower incomes into a tough position financially—and these are people who are already in a tough position. It can result in a parent receiving less child support than they should or in fact being liable to pay more child support than they are able to. From 1 July this year, subject to the passage of this legislation, a parent who lodges a 'return not necessary' form and does not provide income information to Services Australia will have a provisional income created for them by Services Australia that is equal to their self-support amount, and that's the amount of money the parent receiving the child support needs to ensure they can get by with their own living expenses. This will be an important improvement on the current situation, where Services Australia may be applying a provisional income figure to the parent being assessed that is significantly higher than the actual figure. Again, we know this will make a real difference to families who rely on this system and who want it to be as accurate as possible. It will bolster our existing efforts to ensure that child support information is accurate, and it reflects the up-to-date earnings data of families. Child support is too important a system to leave as it is at the moment. As I've said, it is a system that, for many families, works in a reasonable way, and many families are satisfied with the measures and the way the system currently works for them. But there are certainly many families who have difficulties with this system, and we know that in many cases it is women who are suffering as a result of some of the problems that remain in the system. We know that there are opportunities for the system to be used to further financial abuse in relationships where there has been abuse. We know that sometimes the system is not operating as it should to give children the support they should have through life. For all those reasons, this is an important bill. It is an important first step in the commitments our government has made to make this a better system for Australian families, to understand how the system should work in their interest. We recognise the need to reform the system for the sake of parents and children. Parents and children deserve a system that is fit for purpose and effective. We know there is much more work to do, and I look forward to working with the minister, colleagues and other members of the parliament—to doing that work and to continuing to talk with members of my community, who, I know, have a personal interest in this and an understanding of some of the difficulties it can place people in. To all those people in my community—I have seen quite a few of them recently—I say: this bill is a statement of our faith as a government. We are intending to make this a system that works better for Australian families. This is the first step, and there is more to come. 17:39 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Labor has a proud history of improving the lives of Australian children and their families. It was a Labor government that introduced paid parental leave. It was a Labor government that launched the first National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children. And it was a Labor government that legislated child support in 1988. Today we introduce the next stage of child support measures, to ensure that all children are given the financial support they deserve. Under the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Child Support Measures) Bill 2023, loopholes will be closed and more than $160 million of unpaid child support will be recovered and returned to single parents and their children who need it. What we know is that right now there are 18,000 parents who are not paying child support. This means, on average, that 18,000 children are missing out on $11,000 which they are each entitled to receive. This $11,000 could be for schoolbooks, new school shoes, the school excursion or to help put food on the table and pay the bills. As a former teacher in outer Melbourne and Geelong, I know just how challenging it can be for single parents and their children. Child support matters. I saw firsthand how teachers go above and beyond for their students by making sure they have eaten breakfast, have extra help with their homework and return home safely at the end of the day. I continue to hear the stories across my electorate of Corangamite. Breakfast clubs in schools like Leopold Primary School play such an important role in making sure children are looked after. But help like this can only go so far. It's time to fix a system that has not effectively enforced the payment of much-needed child support. This will be non-negotiable under this bill. The Albanese government is determined to help single parents raise their children to the best of their ability, without the anxiety that comes with financial stress. No parent should be forced to choose between paying for petrol for the school pick-up and paying the heating bill. I'm proud that our government has always been at the forefront of this reform. Just yesterday, our government announced $1.9 billion over five years to extend parenting payments to those with children up to 14 years of age. Around 110,000 children will benefit from this scheme, with parents to take home more than $176 extra per fortnight through this Albanese government initiative. It's another milestone in Labor's history, which at its core is all about improving the lives of family and children. Such reforms remind me of the time when the Hawke government stepped in and introduced the groundbreaking child support scheme to ensure that children affected by family breakdown received adequate and fair financial security. The Albanese government is committed to continuing this work. Quite simply, the median income of parents who receive child support is not enough. It sits at around $33,000 annually, which is less than half of national average earnings. Our government recognises the financial stress facing many single-parent families, and that's why, in conjunction with this bill, we're introducing cheaper child care and a number of other measures in tonight's budget to help parents get back to work, earn more and pay their bills. This bill supports reform and ensures that other parents contribute to child support cases. I know that most of these other parents try to do the right thing under the scheme. The data shows that over $33 billion in support payments have been made since the scheme's introduction in 1988. Despite this, child support debt is way too high. From 1 July, the bill will make it easier for Services Australia to collect child support debts, and it will help prevent further debts for low-income families by delivering three key changes. Firstly, it will strengthen Services Australia's powers to collect debts from parents who have not paid their child support. To do this, the bill will expand the circumstances where debts can be deducted directly from a parent's wage. For example, when a child turns 18 and the case for child support has ended, Services Australia can retrieve any outstanding child support debt. At a time where financial stress is incredibly high for many young people, this reform will make sure they have the financial security to, say, move out of home or pursue a career. Secondly, it will stop those parents—who are in the minority—who owe child support and exploit the loopholes of the scheme. One such loophole relates to travel bonds. Currently, by providing a bond, parents can get an exemption from payments if they go overseas. The problem is that, once they return, Services Australia can't keep that bond to contribute towards any unpaid support debts. This is not what the scheme is for, and it's not what we want for our nation's children and single-parent families. This bill will make sure that Services Australia can keep that bond and refuse an exemption for parents who have the means to pay support but choose not to. Not many parents cheat the system in this way, but those who do owe on average more than $43,000 each in child support. Finally, we are addressing the limitations of parental income assessments. Many parents who receive payments make less than $28,000 each year, which means they don't have to lodge a tax return. Without that critical information, Services Australia have to apply a default income assessment for the parent, which in many cases is a wild overestimation of their earnings. This means the guardian parent ends up in a position where they don't receive enough child support. On the flip side, it can also mean the other parent must pay more than they are able to afford. This bill addresses this problem for more than 150,000 parents. This reform will make sure children are better supported by ensuring that parental income assessments better reflect accurate earnings information: parents can advise Services Australia of their actual income at any time, and Services Australia can access information from the Australian Taxation Office. All in all, with this bill, we take the next step towards a better and fairer child support system. We know it will make a substantial difference to the lives of so many families in my electorate, who come to me and talk about this issue. We have listened and we, the Albanese government, are acting. We also recognise that there is more work to do when it comes to improving child support. That's why our government has committed to this bill and to implementing the recommendations of the report from the Joint Select Committee on Australia's Family Law System. Like the Hawke government before us, our government wants to see child support paid in full and on time to make sure that parents have the financial resources they need to meet the costs of supporting a child on an everyday basis. We want to secure a better future for our nation's children; we want to take pressure off parents; we want to make sure we take the burden off teachers, friends and family; and, most importantly, we want this generation of children to look back on these years and know that they were looked after and given every opportunity to reach their potential. Debate adjourned. COMMITTEES 89 COMMITTEES Public Accounts and Audit Joint Committee 89 17:48 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I wish to make a statement on behalf of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit concerning the draft budget estimates for the Australian National Audit Office and the Parliamentary Budget Office for 2023-24. Another year, another JCPAA budget statement. It was a big year last year; we got two budgets in. Of course, this statement has a cult following on budget eve, not least amongst the loyal, dedicated staff in the parliamentary liaison office, who are watching avidly. On behalf of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit, I present this statement on the draft budget estimates of the Australian National Audit Office, the ANAO, and the Parliamentary Budget Office, the PBO. The committee is required under the Public Accounts and Audit Committee Act 1951 and the Parliamentary Service Act 1999 to consider the draft budget estimates of the ANAO and the PBO and to make recommendations to both houses of parliament regarding these estimates. For context, the requirement to make a statement to the parliament in advance of the budget being handed down by a government is an important transparency measure. It assists the parliament and the public in making a judgement on the adequacy of the budget provided to the ANAO and the PBO through comparison with the requested funding—what those independent entities asked for—and the committee's recommendations. For this year's budget, both the ANAO and the PBO have sought additional funding. The committee has carefully scrutinised the ANAO's and PBO's draft budget estimates and has resolved to endorse them, subject to further review of the costings and final estimates which may be agreed with the Department of Finance. The committee considers both offices vital in supporting the work of this parliament and in strengthening integrity and transparency in public administration. The ANAO are seeking an additional appropriation. In presenting its draft budget estimates to the committee, the ANAO noted that machinery-of-government changes following the 2022 federal election—in particular the creation of two new departments of state—will mean that additional costs have been incurred for mandatory financial statements and performance statement audits. Those audits have to be done to a particular standard, and there's little to no discretion, therefore, about the need to do them and to fund them. Further cost pressures have also arisen from the additional audit effort required to maintain compliance with audit standard ASA 315 to maintain adequate cybersecurity and data storage, as well as to meet the increased cost of external financial statement auditing capability where it is required to be purchased from the private sector, usually for highly specialist commercial stuff or in surge periods like the end of the financial year. The total funding request—subject to further refinement with the Department of Finance, as I said—is in the order of $14 million over the forward estimates. The committee acknowledges that the government faces difficult fiscal circumstances in determining this year's budget and also acknowledges that the ANAO received supplementation in the 2021-22 budget, although that was predominantly for performance statement auditing, a new function, not to deal with these cost pressures. However, the committee considers that additional funding for the ANAO is critical to maintain mandatory standards in financial statement auditing, and without this additional funding the ANAO would be required—forced—to reduce its performance auditing budget. In the committee's view the government stands to save much more than it spends by meeting the ANAO's request, because a robust audit function is of critical value to any government, driving, as it does, efficiency and effectiveness throughout the public sector. In that context, the JCPAA endorses the ANAO's budget submission, subject to the ordinary parameter changes and any minor adjustments that may be agreed with the Department of Finance. In essence, the committee recommends that sufficient funding be provided to enable the ANAO to discharge its responsibilities, including rebuilding the performance audit program. That's the outcome we're trying to seek. The numbers always move around a bit, and we'll make judgements when we see what's in the budget. Finally, the PBO's estimated expenses for 2023-24 amount to $9.613 million, and it expects to meet the majority of its fiscal requirements from this appropriation. However, since its creation just over 10 years ago, the PBO has had a special appropriation fund designed to help it meet unexpected cost pressures. That fund, when established, was initially $6 million—it's its cash reserves, if you like—but has run down now to about $1.8 million over the last decade. The PBO is seeking to have the fund replenished to its original level in this year's budget. The committee regards the fund as an important element of the PBO's operational independence. It aligns with international standards, and these are really catchy. If you have a sleeping disorder, you could read the international standards for independent fiscal organisations or independent fiscal institutes, and you will find that fiscal independence through having sufficient cash reserves is a good thing to do. The committee regards this fund as an important element, as I said, of their operational independence and joins with the Presiding Officers to endorse the proposed appropriation. I thank the Auditor-General and the Parliamentary Budget Officer for their work in support of the parliament—they work for the parliament on behalf of the parliament—and for their cooperation in our detailed interrogation of their budget estimates. I also thank the JCPAA and committee members for their thoughtful and detailed consideration of these budget requests. I seek leave to present a copy of my statement. Leave granted. Mr HILL 86256 I present a copy of the statement. Sitting suspended from 17 : 54 to 19: 30 BILLS 90 BILLS Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024 90

Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024

First Reading 90 Second Reading 90 19:31 Dr CHAL 37998 Rankin MERS (—) (): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Stronger foundations for a better future We acknowledge the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people, the Yuggera and Yugambeh country around Logan, and all the First Nations of Australia—their elders, customs and traditions. And we recognise the opportunity that we have this year to move forward together, listening to each other, in a spirit of unity and respect. The budget we present to the Australian people tonight: Provides cost-of-living relief that is responsible and affordable and prioritises those most in need. Delivers historic investments in Medicare and the care economy—making it easier and cheaper for Australians to see their doctor. Broadens opportunity by breaking down the barriers of disadvantage and exclusion. Lays the foundations for growth by embracing clean energy, and investing in value-adding industries, people, skills, technology and small business. And strengthens the budget—with a surplus forecast for this year, with less debt, then smaller deficits, compared with recent budgets. These are the foundations on which our government is building a stronger economy and a fairer society, with greater security in a time of economic uncertainty, more opportunities in more parts of our country, and a renewed determination for Australia to make the most of the defining decade ahead. In all our decisions, we seek to strike a considered, methodical balance between spending restraint to keep the pressure off inflation, while doing what we can to help people struggling to make ends meet; making sure that vital services like Medicare and the National Disability Insurance Scheme are secure, reliable and sustainable; and dealing with immediate, near-term challenges while investing in our long-term national success—seeing our people through the hard times and setting our country up for a better future. Economic o utlook The global economy is slowing due to persistent inflation, higher interest rates and financial sector strains. Outside of the pandemic and the global financial crisis, the next two years are expected to be the weakest for global growth in over two decades. This will affect us here in Australia. Our economic growth is expected to slow from 3¼ per cent this year to 1½ per cent next year, before recovering to 2¼ per cent in the one after. Despite this, our economy will continue to create jobs, and unemployment is expected to remain low by historical standards—4¼ per cent in 2023-24, 4½ per cent the year after. In this environment, inflation remains our primary economic challenge—it drives rate rises and it erodes real wages—which is why this budget is carefully calibrated to alleviate inflationary pressures, not add to them. Our policies to ease the pressure on households will take three-quarters of a percentage point off inflation in 2023-24, which is expected to fall from six per cent this year to 3¼ per cent next year, returning to the RBA's target band in 2024-25—still higher than we'd like for longer than we'd like but tracking in the right direction. So, while Australia may have a lot coming at us, we have a lot going for us as well: high prices for the things we sell overseas; a strong, well-regulated, secure banking system; low unemployment; and welcome signs that after a decade of being kept deliberately low, wages are moving again. Wages growth for 2023-24 is now forecast to be four per cent—up a quarter of a percentage point from what was expected in October. This combination of lower than expected inflation and higher wages means that an earlier and stronger return to real wages growth is forecast for 2023-24. D ELIVERING COST-OF-LIVING RELIEF At the same time, we understand that Australians are under the pump right now. That's why providing responsible, targeted relief is the No. 1 priority in this budget. Our $14.6 billion cost-of-living plan will: Provide help with power bills. Bring down out-of-pocket health costs. Support vulnerable Australians. Create more affordable housing. And boost wages. Power bill relief Back in November, gas bills were set to go up by 20 per cent in 2023-24—and electricity bills were set to rise by 36 per cent. This was the high price Australians were slated to pay for the Russian invasion of Ukraine—and a decade of energy policy failure here at home. Our government refused to stand by and let this happen. We took urgent and targeted action, to place a cap on coal and gas prices. And, tonight, we are delivering up to $3 billion in direct energy bill relief for eligible households and small businesses, co-funded with the states and territories. More than five million households will have up to $500 deducted from their power bills in the next financial year—real relief, right off your power bill, right when you need it. Because of our policies, electricity price increases are expected to be around 25 percentage points less than what was projected—and 16 percentage points less for gas. A big part of making sure that energy bills are more affordable into the future is improving the energy efficiency of Australian homes—and not just new builds. Through this budget, we are investing a billion dollars to help provide low-cost loans for double glazing and solar panels and other improvements that will make homes easier—and cheaper—to keep cool in summer and warm in winter. It's a commonsense program that will help family budgets—and reduce emissions. Lower out-of-pocket health costs Our first budget capped the price of medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme for around 3.6 million Australians, so that most now pay no more than $30 for the medicines that they need. In our second budget, we are investing $2.2 billion to increase access to life-changing medicines through the PBS. And from September this year, patients will be able to get more of the medicine they need for less money and less hassle. Instead of having to go back to their pharmacist every month, many people with common, chronic illnesses will be able to get two months' worth of treatment for over 300 different medicines. This change will save people up to $180 a year. For millions of Australians, the cost of medicines will be cut in half. Supporting Aus tralians doing it tough Our government is proud that in our first year in office 339,000 new jobs have been created. But, even with unemployment at historic lows, we know there are still people struggling to find work and struggling to get by. The pressures on the budget are acute—but as a Labor government we will always strive to help those who need it the most. That's why, tonight, we announce a $40 per fortnight increase for JobSeeker recipients, plus those on youth allowance, Austudy and other income support payments—helping to deliver a much-needed $4.9 billion boost in support to around 1.1 million Australians looking for work, studying or doing apprenticeships. And we are going further to help the single-biggest group of Australians on JobSeeker—those aged 55 and over. Until now, people aged 60 and over and on payments for a long time have received a higher rate, in recognition of the additional barriers they face finding work. But the truth is, it gets more difficult earlier than that. The majority of people aged 55 and over on JobSeeker are women, many with little to no savings or superannuation, and who are at risk of homelessness. So tonight, we're extending the extra support for those aged 60 and over to include Australians aged 55 and over. More help for some of the most vulnerable in our community. In the same spirit, we are expanding parenting payment single, so it will now be available to single parents until their youngest child turns 14, rather than eight. This will provide 57,000 families with an extra $176.90 per fortnight. Over 90 per cent of these parents are single mums; they deserve our respect and support for the incredible job they do. More affordable housing For too long, secure, affordable housing has been out of reach for too many Australians. Tonight, to help ease the pressure on people feeling the pain of rising rents, we are increasing the maximum rates of Commonwealth rent assistance by 15 per cent. This will provide up to $31 extra a fortnight for people renting in the private market and community housing—the largest increase in more than 30 years. But we know an essential part of the solution to pressures in the housing market is more homes for Australians. Our Housing Accord aims to build one million, new, well-located homes over five years from 2024. We're going to help drive this with a new tax break for build-to-rent projects, cutting the managed investment trust withholding tax from 30 to 15 per cent and by increasing the liability cap of the National Housing Finance and Investment Corporation by $2 billion, to support more lending to community housing providers. We want more Australians to know the security of a roof over their head—which is why we're also working with the states and territories to improve planning, build more houses and deliver a better deal for renters. For this same reason, implementation of the $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund is critical—to build more of the social and affordable houses that our people need. Action to keep wages moving Our government came to office promising to get wages moving again. They're now growing at their fastest rate since 2012. And let's be clear: when it comes to the cost-of-living, fair wages for workers are not the problem—they're part of the solution. Meaningful and sustainable wages growth is a fundamental feature of an economy that rewards people for their hard work. That's why we've consistently advocated for low-paid Australians—so they don't go backwards. The Prime Minister has said it many times—the heroes of the pandemic deserve more than our thanks; they deserve fair pay for their vital work. I am proud our budget provides $11.3 billion to fund a 15 per cent increase in award wages, for more than 250,000 aged-care workers. This pay rise will help retain, reward and recruit the hardworking people who care for our loved ones as they grow old. And the message from our government to the aged-care workers of Australia is simple: you deserve every cent. S TRENGTHENING MEDICARE One of the things that makes this the best country in the world is our shared belief that every Australian should be able to access affordable, reliable health care. But right now, too many people are finding it more and more difficult to see a doctor. The costs are too high. The wait times are too long. And the consultation is too short. Families are being forced into a lose-lose choice between getting the help they need or paying their bills. This robs parents of peace of mind; it puts families under strain. It means more problems go undiagnosed or untreated. And it means our workforce is not as healthy or productive as it could be—and should be. We want to change that with new funding to build eight more of our urgent care clinics so people in regional communities and growing suburbs can see a GP and a further $445 million to enable doctors, nurses and allied health professionals to cooperate for better care, changes that will make it easier for Australians to get essential services at their pharmacy, like vaccinations. And, tonight, I am proud to announce, as a centrepiece of this budget: our Labor government will triple the bulk-billing incentive. This is the biggest increase to the incentive, ever, delivering a $3½ billion boost that will help GPs provide free consultations to around 11.6 million eligible Australians, including children, pensioners and other concession card holders. All of this will help take pressure off our public hospitals and emergency departments, still feeling the strain of a once-in-a-century pandemic. And it will ensure that for millions of people, the quality of your health care is guaranteed not by your credit card but by your Medicare card. LAYING THE FOUNDATIONS FOR GROWTH Investing in Medicare, helping with the costs of energy and housing, and supporting people most in need are all essential measures to assist Australians under pressure. But we know the best long-term guarantee of rising living standards, stronger wages and a better quality of life is a growing and productive economy. That's why our budget is underpinned by a plan to modernise our economy and maximise our strengths by: Making Australia a renewable energy superpower, with strong strategic industries in global supply chains. Investing in our people and their skills. And supporting small businesses to innovate and grow. Making Australia a renewable energy superpower Australia's biggest opportunity for growth and prosperity is the global shift to clean energy. By acting now, our resources, our researchers and our regions can help power the world. That's why—in tonight's budget—we are investing $2 billion in a new Hydrogen Headstart program, so Australia can be a world leader in producing and exporting hydrogen power while reducing our emissions in heavy industry here at home. Hydrogen power means Wollongong, Gladstone and Whyalla can make and export everything from renewable energy to green steel. Seizing these kinds of industrial and economic opportunities will be the biggest driver and determinant of our future prosperity. The government is making the biggest ever investment in Australia's energy transformation. This budget allocates $4 billion to realising our future as a renewable energy superpower, bringing the government's total investment to more than $40 billion. This includes part of our $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund, to support the development of green industries, manufacturing and more, and a new capacity investment scheme that will unlock over $10 billion of investment in firmed-up renewable energy projects up and down our east coast. These strategic investments will work in partnership: abundant, affordable renewable energy powering new jobs and new industry in our regions and suburbs, while our safeguard mechanism will encourage business to invest in the path to net zero. Investing in strategic industries To realise this vision, we're making targeted investments in green industries as well as in technology and other value-adding areas, including: A new Powering Australia industry growth centre to help Australian businesses manufacture renewable technologies. Funding to support the growth of quantum and AI. Plus $286 million of investment in our creative sector. This will create new opportunities across our economy—and so will our historic and vital investment in defence and national security. The AUKUS agreement will directly support 20,000 high-skill, high-wage jobs over the next 30 years in advanced manufacturing, and broaden and deepen our industrial base. Investing in people and their skills To make sure all of these jobs and opportunities extend to every part of our country, we're investing $3.7 billion for a revamped five-year national skills agreement with the states and territories. And we're creating 300,000 fee-free TAFE places to train Australians in critical and emerging sectors. We're expanding access to foundational skills so that all Australians aged over 15 can develop their language, numeracy, and digital skills that they need. And we're encouraging more women into apprenticeships through a new Australian Skills Guarantee. Supporting small business In this budget we also back Australian small business with: A $20,000 instant asset write-off. A new Small Business Energy Incentive to support investments in power-saving assets. And new help for small businesses to adopt and adapt to digital technology. BROADENING OPPORTUNITY Women's economic equality We're the first government in Australia's history with a majority of women in our ranks. And as the Minister for Finance and Minister for Women often says, we know equality for women is not an add-on, is not a nice-to-have. It's absolutely crucial for our prosperity. That's why: We've taken action to close the gender pay gap. Introduced 10 days of paid family and domestic violence leave. Made gender equity an objective of the Fair Work Act—and put a new focus on workers in the care economy. And on 1 July, Australians will begin to benefit from cheaper early childhood education and enhanced paid parental leave. Tonight, we build on this work, by dedicating almost $590 million to the National Plan to End Violence against Women and Children. Investing $72.4 million to retain and recruit more early childhood educators. And by abolishing the punitive ParentsNext program, while getting on with designing a voluntary system that genuinely supports mothers preparing for work. Addressing disadvantage in communities Alongside financial support for Australians in need, we're also investing in new programs to tackle entrenched disadvantage. Putting our trust in the knowledge and passion of locals to break the chains of intergenerational poverty. I see it in my own community: library programs unlocking the world of learning, sporting clubs building pride, community groups mentoring young people into apprenticeships. Breakthroughs and progress, driven by locals and leaders. Tonight, we back their hard work with a $200 million plan, which includes: Funding place based partnerships. Encouraging evidence based policy, directed at a local level. Investment in projects that are delivering measurable success. A new partnership that will help government and philanthropy to co-ordinate their efforts. In addition, more funding for community organisations so that they can pay their bills, pay their workers—and keep delivering for people in need. This will sit alongside $1.9 billion for First Nations' health, housing, education, employment and other essential services. And $250 million for a new Central Australia package to improve safety and provide more opportunities for more people in their communities. STRENGTHENING THE BUDGET Fiscal strategy From energy bill relief to national defence, manufacturing to Medicare, investments in this budget aim to make Australia more resilient and more secure in uncertain times. Fundamental to this is our responsible economic management and our efforts to put the budget on a much stronger foundation. This budget, we've returned 82 per cent of the extra revenue windfall that's come largely from lower unemployment, stronger jobs and wages growth, and higher prices for key exports. We've now returned 87 per cent over this budget and the last. We've also found $17.8 billion in savings and redirected spending—$40 billion over two budgets. And we've limited annual real spending growth to just 0.6 per cent over five years. Because our first two budgets made such a firm commitment to responsibility and restraint, we are now forecasting a small surplus in 2022-23—which would be the first in 15 years. We expect that to be followed by a deficit of $13.9 billion in 2023-24. And, lower deficits across the forward years compared to recent budgets. Leading to a $125.9 billion improvement over five years. And a much lower public debt burden. Gross debt to GDP is now expected to peak lower and earlier at 36.5 per cent of GDP in 2025-26, where it will be $154 billion less than was expected in March 2022. And because we are returning most of the welcome improvement in revenue to the budget, debt will be almost $300 billion lower by the end of the medium term, saving $83 billion in interest costs over the next 12 years. Sustainably f unding government services We are expecting one of the biggest turnarounds on record while dealing with a whole host of programs and services that were left without ongoing funding. In October, this meant an additional $4.1 billion in spending. In May, we've had to find another $7½ billion, including: $1½ billion for legacy health funding, and to make sure that Australians retain access to their My Health Record. And more than $800 million to sustainably fund our biosecurity system to keep our farmers and producers secure. Our government is building a strong, sustainable care economy that works for carers and the people they care for, which is why we're extending disability support programs and investing in additional home care packages. We're upholding the security of our nation, and the stability of our region, which is why we're implementing the recommendations of the Defence Strategic Review and allocating $1.9 billion to strengthening our relationships in the Pacific. And we're supporting those who have served and sacrificed, which is why we're spending $64.1 million to continue eliminating the claims backlog, so that veterans get faster access to the support they need and deserve. Structural pressures Beyond the immediate pressures on our budget, there are genuine structural challenges facing us into the future: defence, health, aged care, the NDIS and interest payments on debt. Tonight, we're putting in place some modest, but meaningful revenue measures to help address this, like: Tightening superannuation tax concessions for those with balances exceeding $3 million. A 15 per cent global and domestic minimum tax for large multinational companies. Changes to the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax, so that Australians receive a fairer return on the sale of our natural resources sooner. Raising the tax on tobacco by five per cent for three years. And extending tax compliance programs. But the inescapable truth is that the federal government cannot put all the services that Australians expect and deserve on a more sustainable footing by ourselves. That's why the Prime Minister has brought together the states and territories to agree on a new, cooperative approach—so we can secure the future of essential services and programs that both levels of government support and so we can make sure that the NDIS continues to provide life-changing outcomes for future generations of Australians with a disability. Under Labor, the NDIS is here to stay. We are determined to make sure every dollar counts and every dollar goes to improving the lives of the participants the scheme was established for. Our changes are designed to put the interests of participants first, as we co-operate to moderate growth in costs. It took a Labor Government to create the NDIS and this Labor Government will secure its future. CONCLUSION A hundred and twenty-two years ago today, the federal parliament first met, called to serve a new nation on an ancient continent, created by a vote of the people. Today Australia is bigger, fairer, more diverse, more open to the world and more engaged with our region than anyone alive at Federation could possibly have imagined. And yet what brought this country together was a belief that the future could belong to Australia and that we would be stronger, safer and more prosperous if we worked together to seize its opportunities and share its rewards—a Commonwealth of common purpose. That optimism and resilience has sustained us and carried us through downturns and disaster, through recession and pandemic. And the belief in opportunity fairly shared has underpinned our greatest achievements, from Medicare to superannuation. The same spirit underpins constitutional recognition through a Voice; it drives our government, and it shapes this budget. A determination to tackle the big challenges and seize the big chances. A deep faith in our people, their skills, their smarts, their innovation and aspiration. This tonight is a plan for security, for prosperity, for growth. It's an economic strategy to help with cost-of-living pressures now and to maximise and extend the opportunities of the future to more of our people in more parts of our country in the defining, decisive decade ahead. For all these reasons, I commend this bill and this budget to the House. Debate adjourned. BUDGET 97 BUDGET Documents 97 20:02 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam For the information of honourable members, I present the following documents in connection with the budget for 2023-24: Budget strategy and outlook—Budget paper No. 1—2023-24. Budget measures—Budget paper No. 2—2023-24. Federal financial relations—Budget paper No. 3—2023-24. Agency resourcing—Budget paper No. 4—2023-24. Documents made parliamentary papers. MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 97 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS Budget 97 20:02 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I also present the following ministerial statements: Women's budget statement 2023-24, 9 May 2023. Regional ministerial budget statement 2023-24—Working together to Build Strong and Sustainable Regions, 9 May 2023. Documents made parliamentary papers. BILLS 97 BILLS Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024 97

Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024

First Reading 97 Second Reading 97 20:03 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024 seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of approximately $28 billion, incorporating decisions from the 2023-24 budget. I now outline the most significant items provided for in this bill. The Department of Defence will receive nearly $12 billion, which will support the implementation of the government's response to the Defence Strategic Review, including major investments in military capabilities, as well as enabling ICT capabilities and infrastructure. The Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water will receive close to $9 billion, primarily for Rewiring the Nation to continue expanding and modernising Australia's electricity grids at lowest cost, unlocking new renewables and storage capacity and driving down power prices. The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts will receive approximately $4 billion, including funding for government business enterprises to continue to deliver projects, including the ARTC for the Inland Rail program, WSA Co for the Western Sydney international airport and NBN Co for the election commitment to boost fibre and fast-track the NBN repair job. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) also contains an Advance to the Finance Minister provision of $600 million to provide the government with the capacity to allocate additional appropriations for urgent and unforeseen expenditure. Since March 2020, the AFM provisions in annual appropriations acts have been set at an extraordinary level, primarily due to the unique and evolving nature of the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2023-24 bills return the AFM provisions to conventional levels, as the Australian governments have agreed to a strategic framework to support the transition of measures and policies to a sustainable COVID-19 steady state. These measures should reduce the potential call on AFM provisions in the future, and a specific AFM provision for COVID-19 or other national emergency response is no longer required. This bill also sets the debit limits for payments under the Federal Financial Relations Act 2009 that apply in 2023-24. They are as follows: $5 billion for general purpose financial assistance and $35 billion for national partnership payments. Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedules to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the portfolio budget statements tabled in the parliament today. I commend the bill to this chamber. Debate adjourned. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024 98

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024

First Reading 98 Second Reading 98 20:07 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2023-2024 provides appropriations for decisions taken by government in the 2023-24 budget for the operations of parliamentary departments. The bill seeks parliament's approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of over $314 million. Funding provided through this bill will support the following significant items of parliamentary departments. The Department of Parliamentary Services will receive over $250 million to support the work of the Australian parliament through services to parliamentarians and as custodians of Parliament House. This includes additional funding to alleviate accommodation pressures at Parliament House and to support the delivery of ICT services to other parliamentary departments. This bill also includes an Advance to the responsible Presiding Officer, an APO, of $1.9 million. Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedules of the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the portfolio budget statements tabled in the parliament earlier today. I commend this bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2022-2023 98

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2022-2023

First Reading 98 Second Reading 98 20:10 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. Today, the government introduces the 2022-23 additional estimates appropriation bills. These bills are the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2022-23, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2022-23 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2022-23. These bills underpin the government's expenditure decisions made since the October 2022 budget that relate to the 2022-23 financial year. Appropriation Bill (No. 3) seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $5.5 billion. This would ensure that there is sufficient appropriation to cover estimate variations related to existing programs—for instance, changes to costs for demand driven programs. These bills also pave for the first-year costs for measures announced since the October 2022 budget. The bill provides funding to support the following significant items. The Department of Defence will receive $1.8 billion. This primarily reflects the reclassification of $1.3 billion from capital to operating funding, reflecting updated expenditure requirements and supplementation of $172.3 million for foreign exchange losses incurred during 2021-22. The Social Services portfolio will receive over $1 billion, with the majority of funding provided for the National Disability Insurance Agency to provide reasonable and necessary supports for National Disability Insurance Scheme participants. The Department of Employment and Workplace Relations will receive just under $1 billion, primarily to support apprentices and employers through the boosting apprenticeship commencements wage subsidy. The Department of Health and Aged Care will receive close to $900 million, including $207 million for vaccines and logistics, $182 million to reimburse aged-care providers, a direct cost relating to managing the COVID-19 outbreaks, and $166 million for administration of the COVID-19 vaccine. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will receive over $235 million to meet the surge in demand for passports following the reopening of international borders and for the design and construction of the Australian pavilion at the Osaka World Expo. Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the portfolio additional estimates statements table in the parliament earlier today. I commend the bill to the chamber. Debate adjourned. Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2022-2023 99

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2022-2023

First Reading 99 Second Reading 99 20:14 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The bill seeks approval for appropriations from the consolidated revenue fund of approximately $164 million for the 2022-23 financial year. These appropriations will support the following significant items. The Department of Defence will receive close to $140 million to reflect updated estimates for foreign exchange exposures. The Attorney-General's portfolio will receive over $10 million with approximately $7 million for the Administrative Appeals Tribunal to support the development of a new case management system for a new federal administrative review body. The Department of Health and Aged Care will receive approximately $10 million, including $7 million to manage the COVID-19 vaccine data. Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedules to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the portfolio additional estimates statements tabled in the parliament today. I commend this bill to the House. Debate adjourned. Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2022-2023 99

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2022-2023

First Reading 99 Second Reading 99 20:16 Mr JONES A9B Whitlam I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2022-2023 provides additional appropriations for the operations of parliamentary departments, specifically the Department of the House of Representatives, for the remainder of 2022-23. This bill seeks approval for appropriations from the Consolidated Revenue Fund of $560,000 for the Department of the House of Representatives to support the transition of IT systems to cloud based solutions. Full details of the proposed expenditure are set out in the schedule to the bill, the explanatory memorandum and the portfolio additional estimates statements tabled in the parliament today. I commend this bill to the House as well. Debate adjourned. House adjourned at 20:17 NOTICES 100 NOTICES Presentation 100