2024-02-08 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Thursday, 8 February 2024

The SPEAKER ( Hon. Milton Dick ) was announced by the Serjeant-at-Arms and entered the chamber.

The SPEAKER took the chair at 09:46, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.

PRIME MINISTER OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA 1 PRIME MINISTER OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA Address to Parliament 1 09:47 The SPEAKER 53517 On behalf of the House I welcome, as guests, the President of the Senate and honourable senators to this sitting of the House of Representatives to hear an address by the Hon. James Marape MP, Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea. The Hon. James Marape having been announced and escorted into the chamber— The SPEAKER 53517 Mr Prime Minister, I welcome you to the House of Representatives chamber. Your address today is a significant occasion in the history of our nation and this House. 09:49 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler My friend Prime Minister Marape, and Madam Marape and the delegation as well, on behalf of the government and the people of Australia, it is a great pleasure to so warmly welcome you to the heart of our democracy. You are the first leader of another nation to address us in this chamber since 2020 and the first leader of a Pacific island nation to address the Australian parliament ever. It is fitting that such an honour belongs to Papua New Guinea. Australia and Papua New Guinea are close in every sense of the word. We are the nearest of neighbours, the most steadfast and trusted of partners and the very oldest of friends. Our connection stretches back thousands of years, to Torres Strait Islanders and Indigenous traders weaving together their cultures and communities. While the modern relationship that we celebrate with your visit today has evolved and expanded to include every field of human endeavour, from agriculture and medicine to education, sport and the frontline of clean energy, our bond still holds true to the spirit of those very first exchanges. We embrace each other as equals. We learn from each other as neighbours. We are there for each other as mates, especially when times are hard. In everything our people do together, we nourish our common interests, our shared values and our unique connections, including, of course, a great and growing passion for that mighty cultural institution rugby league. Sport brings our people together. It is a part of our shared bond, and, Prime Minister, like you, I hope the day will come when the people of Papua New Guinea can cheer for a team of their own in the National Rugby League. Next year, we will commemorate and celebrate the 50th anniversary of Papua New Guinea's independence, a momentous day in the life of both our nations. Australia will always be proud of the part we played in that time of historic change, yet we know that independence was never our gift to give. Independence was the people of Papua New Guinea's right to assert. It was your country's opportunity to seize. It was an act of great courage, profound national unity and a statement of self-belief as well as self-determination. It sent a message to our region then; it stands as an example to our region now. It speaks for a universal truth: every Pacific nation, big and small, has the right to shape its own future and secure its own destiny. Mr Prime Minister, half a century ago, the Whitlam Labor government worked with purpose and pride alongside your leaders and your citizens to lay the foundations of a new democracy. Today, our government is partnering with yours to build the architecture of peace and opportunity, to fulfil your vision of a modern and prosperous future for your people—a vision that both our peoples are helping to make real through: teaching together in PNG schools; studying together at Australian universities and TAFEs; working together, including through the expanded and reformed Pacific Australia Labour Mobility scheme to not only bring essential skills to Australian farms and aged-care homes but also send good wages back to families in your country; and working together to build the infrastructure that can transform the words and ambitions of our agreements into concrete realities. We have: new projects backed by Australia—including through the Australian Infrastructure Financing Facility for the Pacific—and built by the people of PNG; over 1,800 kilometres of roads connecting services, supports and supplies to remote villages and giving your farmers and producers access to city markets; upgrades to six priority ports and the building of better biosecurity so PNG can sell more of your world-class cocoa, coffee and seafood to the region and to the world; investment in new clean energy projects to bring light, power and economic opportunities to homes and schools, hospitals and health centres; and the building of new undersea cables, breaking down the barriers of isolation to bring jobs and education in reach of boys and girls alike. Mr Prime Minister, Australia wants to build this future with you and secure it with you as your primary partner. Central to this is the new bilateral security agreement that we signed here in Parliament House in December last year, which is the beginning of a new era of cooperation between our nations spanning defence, border policy, policing and maritime security, and meeting the urgent challenges of cybersecurity and climate change. It's an agreement for the future but one anchored in our shared history. On the other side of the world, in a quiet French village that I've had the privilege of visiting called Villers-Bretonneux, when the children of the local school play in the yard each day, they look up at a big banner that says, 'Do not forget Australia'—a sacred command from one generation to the next, given in honour of the memory of more than 3,000 Australians who died defending the town from German attacks during the First World War. Villers-Bretonneux is a name that lives in Anzac legend and so is Kokoda. When Australians reflect on the heroism the people of Papua New Guinea showed in the defence of their homeland; when we remember those soldiers and coastwatchers serving and sacrificing together, and the families and communities who risked their own lives to feed, guide and help Australians in desperate need during our darkest hour; and when we remember the care and kindness your people extended to wounded diggers in their hardest moments of pain and fear, I say to you: Australia will never forget Papua New Guinea. Those words do not need to be displayed on a sign or engraved on a memorial, because they were written by the courage of your people and they are recorded in every Australian heart. When I had the great honour of addressing the PNG parliament at the beginning of last year, the first foreign leader to do so, I said this would be a decisive decade for both our nations and for the Indo-Pacific. It will be a decisive decade for us and it can be a decisive decade because of us, because of what we decide together—Papua New Guinea and Australia—the cooperation and stability we can build together, the peace and security we can uphold together, the growth and prosperity we can achieve together, the broader opportunity and deeper equality we can create together and the democratic values we can champion together. We're two free, proud and independent democracies; two countries home to unique environmental treasures; two lands rich in natural resources and richer still in human potential; two bold, diverse and resilient populations ready to make this decade our own as neighbours and mates, partners and equals. Prime Minister Marape, Australians will never forget what the people of Papua New Guinea did for us in the past. Let us never doubt what we can achieve together in our future. You are most welcome in our parliament today. You are welcome in Australia always, and we look forward very much to your speech today. Welcome, Prime Minister. 10:00 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson It will come as no surprise to our guest of honour here today that I wholeheartedly support the hospitable words which Prime Minister Albanese has delivered on behalf of the government. In that same spirit, I extend to you, Prime Minister Marape, to Madam Marape, to the ministers and to the other members of your delegation a very warm welcome on behalf of the coalition and the federal opposition. Friends are dear, and you and your people are our dear friends. While you are your country's eighth Prime Minister, you are the first Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea to address a joint sitting of the Australian parliament, as has been noted, and this is indeed a historic moment. Our two nations share a history which has brought you here today, and your presence here carries with it the weight of that shared history. In reflecting on that shared history, we reignite our appreciation for Australia and Papua New Guinea's deep connections and how we formed an abiding friendship. There was, of course, our prehistoric beginnings, when Australia and New Guinea were a single continent. Even after melting ice sheets and rising seas separated us some 8,000 years ago, contact was maintained via trade between our two coastal Indigenous populations, who island-hopped across the Torres Strait. The Enlightenment and the age of empires saw European exploration and colonisation of the Pacific between the 16th and 19th centuries. That inevitably brought modernity in all its forms and shades, and by the 20th century our two countries' fates were interlocked through a series of events over almost seven decades. We were bound together in 1906, with Australia's administration of the Territory of Papua—formerly British New Guinea—and bonds tightened further with Australia's governing of New Guinea—formerly German New Guinea—from 1920, after the defeat and withdrawal of the Kaiser's forces. The Second World War, as the Prime Minister rightly pointed out, saw us face a mutual threat. As brothers in arms we fought against the invading imperial Japanese forces, most doggedly on the Kokoda track. Amidst the hell of war and the sacrifice which came from service, we formed an imperishable friendship. That fellowship is encapsulated in Peter Ryan's Fear Drive My Feet, an account of his experiences and survival as an Australian intelligence operative behind enemy lines. Peter was supported by villagers, carriers and police boys, whom he remembered with affection and described as 'dignified and indispensable'. To this day, Australians commemorate the tenacity of your soldiers, the bravery of your coast watchers and the compassion of your fuzzy wuzzy angels, who all helped turn the tide of the war. Soon after the war, the two territories became one in 1949, in a changing and decolonising world. As the want for trusteeship waned, wishes for independence grew. Prime Minister Robert Menzies championed the right of the people of Papua and New Guinea to choose their own future. In March of 1962, Menzies expressed Australia's great sense of moral responsibility for the welfare of the people to whom we stand in special relationship. Menzies spoke of our aim to create and develop the capacity of independent self-government. Off the back of a remarkable nation-building endeavour, Papua New Guinea's independence arrived in 1975. It was an achievement of two peoples: those who desired their freedom and those who wished and supported their friends to attain it. Prime Minister Marape, in the almost half-century since the birth of your independent nation, Papua New Guinea and Australia have accomplished much together. Personal friendships, professional relationships and government partnerships have grown in substance and indeed number across the years. I was honoured to be part of the previous Australian government, under the coalition, which, together with you and your colleagues in the last government, opened new pipelines of enterprise and collaboration. Through Australia's establishment of the New Colombo Plan in 2014, our students have had the privilege to study, work and learn in PNG. In 2015 we launched the Pacific Leadership and Governance Precinct, which has seen thousands of your public servants receive training at both our universities. Australia was honoured to support PNG in hosting a highly successful APEC meeting in 2018, and in the same year we handed over the first Guardian class patrol boat, now No. 4 in your defence force. I pay true tribute to you, Prime Minister Marape, and to former Australian prime minister Scott Morrison. Together, your leadership and vision saw us elevate our special relationship in 2020 to a comprehensive, strategic and economic partnership. Perhaps there was no prouder moment in recent history than our cooperation during the pandemic. We fought it together, Prime Minister, and Australia was proud to provide assistance to PNG in distributing vaccines, delivering personal protective equipment when it wasn't otherwise available, and deploy medical teams and Defence Force personnel. We also combated the scourge of illegal fishing and people-smuggling in our region together, and for that we're very grateful. Prime Minister Marape, at the Lowy Institute in 2019 you spoke about writing a new book for Papua New Guinea. Under your leadership, your country is penning the first chapters of that new book. Like you, I am confident it will be filled with many stories of success, and I'm certain Australia will feature in those chapters both as a partner of choice and as a close friend of Papua New Guinea. In your Lowy address I was moved about your words about Papua New Guinea seizing its own destiny and not allowing external forces to dictate the direction you take. Australia supports you and your country in that noble endeavour. In the same spirit, we welcomed your independence in 1975. Of course, we find ourselves in precarious times. We find ourselves in times of emboldened autocrats who have no hesitation in using inducements, coercion and outright force against other nations to realise their zero-sum ambitions. These autocrats who use the carrot one day and the stick the next have a complete disregard for sovereignty, the law and liberty. Our forebears knew only too well the price paid for insecurity and aggression which goes undeterred. Indeed, within the deep soil of your country and flowing through the blood of Papua New Guineans and Australians is the memory of the service and sacrifice of our forebears. May our memory of them impel us to become stronger together through our defence and security cooperation, and may we form fellowships of greater strength with our mutual partners and friends in the Pacific and the wider region. From strength comes security, from security comes stability, and from stability comes prosperity. Prime Minister Marape, you are a dear friend to Australia. We welcome you dearly to the Australian parliament. We look forward most sincerely to your address with anticipation, with attentive ears and with abiding friendship in our hearts. Honourable members: Hear, hear! 10:07 The SPEAKER 53517 Mr Prime Minister, it gives me great pleasure to invite you to address the House. THE HONOURABLE Mr JAMES MARAPE ( Prime Minister of the Independent State of Papua New Guinea) : Mr Speaker, the Hon. Prime Minister, the Hon. Leader of the Opposition, Madam Senate President, the honourable members of the House of parliament, people of Australia: I want to begin by firstly appreciating and acknowledging the Ngunnawal people, the traditional custodians of the land in which we gather here today. Yesterday I was given the extraordinary honour and privilege to witness the Welcome to Country, and I want to appreciate the elders and people past, today and those who are emerging into the future. I bring to you warm greetings from my people—the people of Papua New Guinea—to each and every one of your leaders in this House. But, more importantly, please, as you visit your constituents, convey our best wishes, our regards and, importantly, our thankfulness to the good people who have been so kind and wonderful to my people. Let me congratulate you, having reached your 236 national anniversary day. In my calendar, I celebrate with your mission staff in Port Moresby every time it comes around. Thank you for according me a special service as a guest of Australia today. Today, my delegation, including my wife, are absolutely honoured that you have received us very well. Prime Minister, I appreciate your suggestion and the fruition of that invitation. Thank you very much. Mr Speaker, thank you for graciously allowing me into your House. As I begin my speech, let me start with a reflection: a leader from the Highlands of Papua New Guinea, where I come from, once visited Canberra, in Australia, in the 1950s. His name was Kondom Agaundo. He made a speech in his own mother tongue because he knew no English, and it drew some laughter from the crowd. He made a statement that is quite sentimental and historic. He said: 'Today, I come to you and speak to you in my language and you laugh at me. One day my son will come to you and speak in your language and you will certainly listen.' Today, as I stand before you in your wonderful House, this prophecy is being fulfilled. I speak to you in the language you taught me. I hear every word that Prime Minister Albanese and the opposition leader say, and I hear every word that Australia has been speaking and uttering to us since 1901, when you became your own sovereignty, and your adoption of us into your family in 1906. As the prophecy of one of the fathers of my nation comes to pass today, I come to you as their son—a son of Papua New Guinea. I don't come to you as James Marape. I speak as the chief servant of the people of the most diverse nation on the face of planet Earth. We have many tribes and many languages but one nation. I am very deeply honoured to be accorded this rare privilege, being the first prime minister of my country to address the Australian parliament. It is a high privilege that I do not take for granted. My people and I will treasure this moment as a moment of honour for Papua New Guinea and, more importantly, the Papua New Guinea-Australia relationship. Thus, it is with a profound sense of humility and responsibility that I am giving you this address. This is truly a historic moment for my country, and, as I stand and gaze upon the halls of this magnificent building, I am reminded of the long journey that you too have taken to arrive at this point, at this time and at this place. This is a magnificent parliament house—a truly impressive architectural and landscape marvel. It carefully blends the atmosphere of a modern, thriving Australia but, more importantly, with the revered traditions of your Indigenous people. It is a proud testament to the resilience and tenacity of Australian people to survive and flourish against all odds and to your continued upholding of democracy and its freedom-enriching way of life that all of us, we too in Papua New Guinea, have come to love and cherish. It was from this parliament that the 98th act of 1975, called the Papua New Guinea Independence Act 1975, cut the umbilical cord from the womb of Australia to birth Papua New Guinea. I want to say thank you very much. It was from this parliament that many decisions were made that have helped to shape what Papua New Guinea was before 1975 and what Papua New Guinea is after 1975. This is why Papua New Guinea has a very special and very unique relationship with Australia. We are the only country Australia has birthed. Many young Papua New Guineans and perhaps Australians do not realise the depth of our shared history—let me remind them. Barely out of colonisation yourself, when six colonies merged into a federation that became an independent nation from Great Britain in 1901, Australia officially took over Papua New Guinea as its own colony in 1906, until you granted us independence in 1975. Through those years, our two people passed through the World War I periods, the great pandemic of the late 1900s—I think 1918 it was, or 1919. We passed through the Depression of the 1920s and the 1930s. We passed through World War II, when, in defence of our territories, the Kokoda spirit was born. After World War II, your public servants, your teachers, your healthcare workers, your Christian missionaries, your business folks and many, many more continued to work over in the 1950s and 1960s until our political independence in 1975. Many of these Australians lost their lives in the course of duty. Some did remain back to continue on saving after 1975. The amount of work that was really put into the administration of Papua New Guinea can never be ignored by Papua New Guineans. History holds all the details, for the greatest and most profound impact of the Australian administration is the democracy you left with us. Our constitution, our democratic system of government, our judiciary, the public service, the education system, our financial and banking system and our Christian worldview are what you left in PNG. You see, me standing here, speaking in English—I learnt that through the school system you set up. The God I worship today, the Christian God, is a God your missionaries brought into Papua New Guinea. The imprint of Australia is second to none in Papua New Guinea. Your legacies live on. Let me say, amongst all the legacies—and if I could be respectful—no greater legacy remains forever in the hearts and minds of Papua New Guinea than the great imprint of Gough Whitlam's Labor government, agreeing to the work Menzies may have started and the generation in the sixties may have started. The final cut in the umbilical cord between Australia and PNG took place under the watch of prime minister Whitlam and my forerunner, the father of my country, Great Grand Chief Sir Michael Thomas Somare. It was the Labor Whitlam government and the Somare Pangu government, on this day 50 years ago, that set in motion that train to make Papua New Guinea become a democratic sovereignty. And I want to pay my homage to the memory of prime minister Whitlam. Whilst he may take the greater limelight today, it is better said and appreciated than not at all. I want to say thank you to all before him but more importantly to the memory of prime minister Whitlam for being perhaps the most socially progressive of his time, for his policy of self-determination for Indigenous people of Australia and for hearing the cries of the founding fathers of Papua New Guinea for our own self-determination. Last night, Minister Penny Wong passed on a piece of gem to me when we were sitting at the dinner table. And thank you, Opposition Leader, for gracing us. Mr Speaker and Madam President, thank you for your wonderful hospitality last night, when Prime Minister Albanese and I were together. Whitlam's quote goes like this: If history were to obliterate the whole of my public career, save my contribution to the independence of a democratic PNG, I should rest content. Mr Whitlam, we honour your memory, Sir. Your name is now etched into the history books of Papua New Guinea forever, taught in schools and uttered every year when we raise our flag and celebrate it—our independence on 16 September. Hundreds of years may pass, even when James Marape moves on from public life. But the name Gough Whitlam will forever live on because of Papua New Guinea and because of Australia. Because of your leadership then and his generation of leaders, Papua New Guinea is independent today. Rest content in God's bosom, Mr Whitlam. Forty-nine years later we are here on the eve of the 50th anniversary of Papua New Guinea's nationhood. And you may ask me this question: how have the 49 years been for Papua New Guinea? Of course, needless to remind you, most of you know our anguish, and you also know whatever joys we have, including the joys on the rugby league field that we find. It is true that our challenges are many and our systems remain fragile. It is true that our people need greater empowerment in many aspects of their lives, but not all is bad—not all is bad. Nearly 50 years on, our democracy remains as strong as ever. Our constitution is as bold as ever, since it was mounted first in our Constituent Assembly on 15 August 1975 under Australian administration. We have not fallen to the barrel of a gun as many emerging nations globally have fallen to, and our democracy in a land of a thousand tribes remains vital. Its vitality is secure and intact. Despite the huge challenges of our land, the diversity of culture and languages and a weak economic starting point in 1975, our thousand tribes are still keeping on as one people, one nation, one country in total allegiance to the constitution. Our people are resilient and continue to draw strength from the traditional social support system refined over thousands of years. Since 1975, we have run 10 elections. Many of them had their fair share of challenges, but we unfailingly have produced governments. Yes, there might have been many contested along the way, including votes of no confidence, but we have remained one democratic nation, maintaining the core of democracy in our country. We have not failed to uphold the values and principles of democracy as enshrined in our national constitution. Many people forget the huge disadvantage we started with and the natural obstacles we continue to face. Our country is a big country. We're not a small island state. We're a big country. Our country comprises 462,840 square kilometres of land. To give you some context, the land size is bigger than Japan, bigger than New Zealand, bigger that the United Kingdom, or England. It is one of the most rugged and inaccessible countries in the world because of its impenetrable, dense tropical rainforests, its terrain, its thick jungles, open valleys, large swamplands, complex river systems, which are ready to fire up your clean energy source, isolated islands and far-flung atolls—a huge diversity in terms of not just culture and people but the landscape itself. Throw into that a starting economic base of a five billion kina economy—in relation to Australian dollars it was possibly under A$1 billion—in 1975. We had a population base of 3.5 million, 95 per cent of whom were illiterate, all diverse and living in rural areas, a country with no modern infrastructure, with only a few small scattered towns and a very small percentage of people in formal employment. My own Huli tribe, for instance, came first into contact with government and church workers in 1952. This was our starting point in 1975. These have all been our challenges. But, as I visit you today, I ask you: do not give up on Papua New Guinea. We have always bounced back from our low moments and we will continue to grow, learning from every low moment and every high moment. We learn from past experiences. In this regard, I want to indicate to this House that we are making structural reforms and trying our best to improve our public sector efficiency, to carry the country for the next 50 years. These reforms and changes include our governance and our public service structure. Change is also being made to our courts, our judiciary and the police force, and we are also strengthening our anticorruption laws and environment. For the economy, we have made great progress over the last couple of years. You will recall my five billion kina economy starting point. When I took government, in 2019, we were an 80 billion kina economy. Today, the IMF and World Bank will confirm that we are operating in an 111 billion kina economy. Our own government and my generation of leaders aim to move it to a 200 billion kina economy—if not in the next 10 years, at the very earliest. The need to move the economic pendulum is more important right now because of the higher growth of population we have in Papua New Guinea. Economists amongst us would know that population must grow lower than economic growth to sustain an economy. That is our target. Having said that, I thank all the people of Australia who have helped shape and build my country: politicians, public servants, missionaries, members of non-government agencies and organisations, businessmen and businesswomen. I also want to take this time to, in a special way, thank a special group of people: patrol and district officers. Sometimes we have left them behind in our praise for others. We call them in PNG, in a special way, the kiaps. This special breed of men patrolled my country, well into its interior, in the 1950s and 1960s, after the war. Many of them lost their lives from the challenges of that occupation. It is on this note that I want to acknowledge a couple of special surviving kiaps who are still here with us—three of them in this precinct, in the public gallery: Graham Watts, who served in Rabaul; Bill Sanders, who served in Simbu; and John and Morag Hocknell. They are present in the public gallery. I just want to appreciate them. They represent the fair dinkum spirit of Aussies, if I can put it that way, leaving the comfort of their own homes and travelling unto uncharted territories. There are books, as far as PNG relations with Australia are concerned, that must be written many, many times over. In 1975, Mr and Mrs Hocknell, for instance, who were in their early twenties, witnessed the lowering of the Australian flag for the last time, and the uplifting and hoisting of the PNG flag for the first time, in remote Komo in the Southern Highlands of Papua New Guinea. Komo would have seen the first outside contact through them. They had their first son born, with no modern hospital care, in the remote villages of the Southern Highlands of Papua New Guinea. This is what I'm talking about, part of the contribution Australians have made to my country. I want to acknowledge them and I want to acknowledge all who worked there. The Somare generation of Papua New Guineans are also present here. I've brought with me two of the finest of our country. They represent the generation of Somare, Sir Pita Lus and the fathers of my country. I have Sir Nambuga Mara, representing the provincial governments, and I have Sir Yano Belo, from the first cabinet of 1975. That generation of Papua New Guineans and that generation of Australians ensured the Papua New Guinea and Australia of 2024 are together. I want to appreciate them sincerely, from the bottom of my heart. This generation planted the seed of democracy and political independence. Mr Speaker, they worked hard in their time. I want now to extend my great appreciation to all of you successive governments of the past. Since then, many governments have come and gone on both sides of the Torres Strait. Many heads of mission have come and gone from representing Australia in PNG. I want to thank all who have stayed with us for the last 49 years: governments of the past and members of parliament, public servants, as well as heads of mission. Many came last night who have continued to maintain an affinity for Papua New Guinea. I just want to say thank you very much to all who have stayed with us the last 49 years. Thank you for your continued support throughout the life of our nationhood. Your assistance in education, in health, in infrastructure developments, in ports, roads and telecommunications et cetera, continues to play a very crucial role in the development of our country. I want to also acknowledge, in the same vein, all Australian investors who continue to invest in Papua New Guinea. Australian businesses comprise the biggest pool of foreign investors in Papua New Guinea. Thank you for your support to our economy. For my government, I also acknowledge the Liberal led government under my friend Scott Morrison for their support. Peter, you are here. I want to acknowledge the time we served in government together on both sides. And I want to acknowledge my good friend Prime Minister Albanese and your present Labor government. All governments have been kind to us and fair to us, but under my watch I have been privileged to have served alongside both a Liberal government and a Labor government. The Comprehensive Strategic and Economic Partnership that we mounted in 2020 is an embodiment of our PNG-Australia relationship, which has elevated even higher. This program entrenches the direction I am taking for my country, which is to move PNG away from being an aid-recipient nation to becoming a very important economic partner nation and an economically self-reliant nation. I want to also appreciate Prime Minister Albanese and your Labor government for the recent signing of the bilateral security agreement. This holds the blueprint that reflects our focus collectively, and my focus, on PNG becoming a strong, economically resilient nation. A strong, economically empowered Papua New Guinea means a stronger and more secure Australia and Pacific. I repeat: a strong, economically empowered Papua New Guinea means a stronger Australia and a more secure Australia and Pacific. Next year, 2025, PNG will celebrate 50 years of nationhood, and I take this opportunity to invite all Australian leadership to join us in our celebration. The key institutions of our society that you have helped establish will be turning 50 as we hold our country's Golden Jubilee. Last year we celebrated 50 years of our central bank. Our central bank was still reporting to the Australian federal reserve in 1973. Last year we celebrated 50 years of Air Niugini, our national airline carrier. Last year we celebrated 50 years of our national broadcaster, the National Broadcasting Corporation. This year, we will witness our national and supreme courts, and other several key institutions of state, celebrating 50 years. We thank Australia for the profound work that went into setting up these key institutions that remain the anchor of our free, vibrant democracy. Last year, Prime Minister Albanese, when you addressed our national parliament, I must say it moved all of us, it touched all of us. You spoke of Papua New Guinea as an equal, a core development partner in the Pacific with Australia and New Zealand. You gave the assurance that Australia would help PNG in our core focus areas of security, labour mobility, youth empowerment and downstream processing of our renewable resources as we work together going forward. Of course, you also saw the need for us to use rugby league to unite the most diverse nation on the face of planet Earth. I am grateful for this, Mr Prime Minister. I am grateful for your deep commitment to our shared values and principles. Your call is a call in the right direction—to complete and continue nurturing Papua New Guinea to become economically independent and a strong nation. Papua New Guinea must not continue to be an aid-grant-receiving nation, a nation that depends on borrowing every year to survive. We must become a strong country, standing on our two feet, economically independent and strong so we too can help Australia maintain democracy, preserve peace and ensure stability in our part of planet Earth, in our Pacific. As a country that is on the western fringes of our region, we view this as something that must be done with a sense of urgency, and we take this responsibility seriously. Papua New Guinea forever appreciates the assistance by Australia to become safe, secure and free from the transnational crimes of drug trafficking, firearm trade, money-laundering, terrorism and others. We aspire to be a safe and secure country with a robust economy. Honourable members, you will note my underlying tone here of deep gratitude. Australia has been a huge pillar of support for my country and my people. Ours is a relationship that has shared ethnicity, that is built on shared ethnicity between the Torres Strait Islanders and my people up north from you, between the Indigenous Australian people and the Melanesian people, who have lived in this space of planet earth for more than thousands of years. History shows that we have lived over 10,000 years in this part of planet earth. We are also locked into earth's crust together. If you look into your geological study, you realise that the Indo-Australian Plate holds us together; we share that, and so one might say we are joined at the hips. We are going nowhere, but we must coexist until Jesus comes. Our shared modern history of over a century or maybe more makes us uniquely related. Many of us in Papua New Guinea see Australia as a big brother or sister who took care of us when you were still a teenager. You nurtured us into young adulthood and continue to support us to this day. If Britain was our imperial mother, as they say—this certainly holds a lot of truth—we were cut out from the same democratic cloth. One can choose friends, but one is stuck with family forever. One is stuck with family forever. Our two countries are stuck with each other. We have no choice but to get along. We have no choice but to get along. Mr Speaker and honourable members, today I carry the humble and deep, deep gratitude of my people, a thousand tribes. And on their behalf I want to thank Australia for everything you have done and continue to do for us. We realise our success as a nation will be the ultimate payoff for the work put in by many, many Australians of past. I therefore commit my generation of Papua New Guineans to augmenting the sanctity of our democracy and progressing our economy. We pledged to work hard to make sure PNG emerges as an economy that self-sustains our nation so that we too can help keep our region safe, secure and prosperous for our two people and those in our Indo-Pacific family. In a world of many relations with many nations, nothing will come in between our two countries because we are friendly. Through tears, blood, pain and sacrifice that are now anchored in our eternal past, our nations are constructed today. A Greek proverb goes like this, in closing—Mr Speaker, I will not keep you long. A Greek proverb goes like this, and I paraphrase: our society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they will not sit under. The Whitlam-Somare generation planted the trees of democracy and free-market economy whose shade we enjoy today. These great leaders, whose shoes I will, sadly, never fill—did their part and they've moved on into the enclaves of history. But I ask myself this question, as the chief servant of my country: am I planting enough trees for the shade in which my child and the child of Papua New Guinea and Australia can sit? Maybe you too can ponder this question with regard to our two people, two nations and two economies. Yesterday, I reminded my Ngunnawal elder sister, Sister Serena Williams—I met her outside, and she is sitting somewhere here. I reminded her and her family, when they received me into the country, of the impossibility of unwinding the past but the absolute possibility of constructing the future. I say the same remark again here in Canberra, the great meeting place of the Ngunnawal people and now modern Australia. Our set past we cannot change, the good and the bad—more good, I know—but it must become the tailwind to guide and shepherd us into our collective future. Our future becomes more certain when we find common grounds to preserve and protect each other. In closing, I want to thank very much every Australian for what you have done for Papua New Guinea thus far. Today I did not come to give you more requests; rather, I came to say thank you. Tanikiu bada bada herea. Tanikiu. Tenkyu tumas. Bipla tenkyu tru long olgeta Austrelia. I speak in the language that my three friends up in the public gallery can understand, and I want to say thank you to all Australians. You have helped us shape what is modern day Papua New Guinea. We're looking forward to not letting down the aspirations of those who came before us in the preservation of our democracy in a modern, thriving Papua New Guinean economy. Contribute where you can and leave the rest to us. We will do our best. May God forever bless Australia and may God forever blessed Papua New Guinea. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Members and senators having risen and applauded— The SPEAKER 53517 Mr Prime Minister, on behalf of the House I thank you for your address. I wish you and Madam Marape a successful and enjoyable visit to Australia. I thank the President of the Senate and senators for their attendance. I invite the Prime Minister to escort our guest from the chamber. The chair will be resumed at the ringing of the bells. Sitting suspended from 10:4 9 to 12:20 BILLS 8 BILLS Modern Slavery Amendment (Australian Anti-Slavery Commissioner) Bill 2023 8

Modern Slavery Amendment (Australian Anti-Slavery Commissioner) Bill 2023

Report from Federation Chamber 8 Third Reading 8 12:20 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time. BILLS 8 BILLS Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024 8

Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024

Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024

Second Reading 8 12:22 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins Labor's tax plan joins other Labor legacies, including child care and paid parental leave, as amongst the biggest economic leavers supporting women who want to work more. With 53 per cent women, the Albanese government understands that gender equality and women's economic advancement go hand in hand. We get it. But there are other beneficiaries. Ninety-eight per cent of 18- to 26-year-olds will get a tax cut, when many of these people would have got absolutely nothing under Morrison's old tax plan. These are children. These are sons and daughters. They're nieces, nephews and grandkids. This is the intergenerational dividend that we are bringing forth with this new plan. A uni student working part time and earning $27 per hour could receive a tax cut of up to $500. A nurse on $76,000 would get a tax cut of nearly $1,600. A couple saving up for their first home with a combined income of $150,000 could get a combined tax cut of just over $3,000. A person who is a town planner, for example, on $90,000 could get a tax cut of nearly $2,000. An events manager on $85,000 could get a tax cut of just under $2,000. And a person earning $200,000 will still get a tax cut of $4,500 or thereabouts. Advice from the Treasury and the RBA is that Labor's tax cuts will deliver more relief for more workers without adding to inflationary pressures or burdening the budget. I encourage all of my constituents to read the Treasury advice, which we did release. A massive leaver that sweeps over the nation bringing more to all Australians when they need it most and rewarding their efforts is the essence of aspiration. Aspiration is not the monopoly of the few. It belongs to every single Australian. My own story and that of my parents is testament to that. The Grattan Institute recently torpedoed the coalition's claims around bracket creep. The Grattan Institute's own independent analysis found that these tax cuts would ensure that 83 per cent of taxpayers will actually be better off in a decade from now. But then there are constituents in my community who have been disappointed with this change. These people are in the higher income bracket and they constitute around one in four taxpayers in Higgins. Those who earn $150,000 and above will still get a tax cut. In fact, they will receive the biggest tax cut of all. We are, for the first time in 16 years, raising the highest tax threshold from $180,000 to 190,000. Higher income earners do a lot of the heavy lifting, as far as tax revenue is concerned, and these people have budgeted for this additional money. Many of them have, like everyone else, outgoings, except their outgoings tend to be a quantum higher—school fees, childcare fees, private health insurance, rent, mortgages. They bought homes at a time when the RBA advised them that interest rates would be flat and now, of course, they are getting stung with high interest rates, like many other Australians. They are no different. These people, rightly, where waiting for tax relief. Well, we are giving them tax relief by raising the tax threshold to $190,000 and they are also getting a tax cut. But I do want to acknowledge their disappointment. However, for all they complain, the Liberals in their decade of government did not provide higher income earners with any tax relief, even during good economic weather, and I think real questions need to be asked. Instead, they legislated the stage 3 tax cuts to kick in five years later, effectively kicking the can down the road. As the Prime Minister said at the National Press Club on 25 January this year, pretending you knew exactly what the economy would look like in five years was a triumph of hope over experience and economic reality. Now the party of robodebt and car park rorts question our integrity. Integrity in leadership means making the right decisions, rather than the easy ones. An inflexible government unwilling to adapt to changing economic realities is, frankly, irresponsible and even dangerous. When there is clearly a better option for cost-of-living pressures, workforce participation, women and the economy, not making the change is irresponsible. I liken this to when I practised as a doctor. I would see a patient scheduled for surgery and they had a healthcare plan. If that patient then came back three weeks later having had a heart attack and stroke, do you think that their medical plan is going to be the same? Of course not. The medical plan would completely change. Now, we can spend hours debating the intricacies of tax reform but until we reform our political norms we will be unable to have mature conversations about our future. When everything gets weaponised, we are all poorer for it. Australians are under pressure right now, and it is crystal clear that every taxpayer up and down the income scale needs and deserves tax relief. We are being responsive to challenging economic times by applying the same agility that is demanded, in fact expected, in every other field, whether it be business, medicine or finance, by delivering better tax cuts that come with an economic dividend. We owe it to all Australian taxpayers and, most importantly, to each other to do more. 12:28 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie I rise to talk on this treasury laws amendment bill—cost-of-living tax cuts, as Labor call it. What a shame, how disappointing is it that I have to rise to speak on this, given that the Labor Party promised at the last election that they would keep stage 3 tax cuts. The previous speakers, all three of them over there, right in front of me, including the members for Robertson and Higgins, were elected based on a lie, an absolute lie. The Prime Minister stated clearly that stage 3 tax cuts would be there. They would be there—100 per cent. Mr HOWARTH 247742 Keep talking, member for Robertson. We will be in your electorate, champ, and yours, member for Higgins—I was down there the other week. The reality is that this Prime Minister can't lie straight in bed. He and the Treasurer, Jim Chalmers, said in a media release on 26 July 2021, 'An Albanese Labor government will deliver the same legislated tax relief to more than nine million Australians as the Morrison government.' That's what they said. The Treasurer, Mr Chalmers, put that out with the Prime Minister: An Albanese Labor Government will deliver the same legislated tax relief to more than 9 million Australians as the Morrison Government. The member for Robertson, the member for Higgins and others were elected based on that commitment on 26 July 2021. Then they come in here and try to justify this lie to their electorates. I mean, give me a break! Seven News also reported on the election day, 21 May 2022, that 'Stage 3 tax cuts are legislated under the previous government and they're locked in, according to the Leader of the Opposition, Anthony Albanese.' That's what Seven News reported. Post-election, the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, in June 2022, said: … they are legislated, and one of the things that people have a right to believe, is that when a politician makes a commitment before an election, they keep it, and I intend to do just that. That's what the Prime Minister said. That's what the Australian people need to know. The people of Petrie, the people sitting up there in the gallery: this is your Prime Minister. This is what he said before the election. This is what he said plenty of times after the election. Now he comes in here and breaks that promise. Mark my words, this bill is a seven per cent increase for some people on their tax—$70 on every thousand—and 15 per cent for some people, increases based on legislation, and they're giving a measly three per cent for people under 45 grand. Anyway, we'll come back to that. Let's keep going. On 11 November 2022 on Seven News, the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, said, 'My word is my bond,' and, 'We said during the election campaign that we would maintain the position that had already been legislated. I've always been a man of my word, and I believe that, when you go to an election and you make commitments, you should stick to them.' That's what the people of Robertson and the people of Petrie heard from the Prime Minister—that he would stick to these election commitments. Again, a journalist said to him, after he was elected—not that long ago—'Stage 3 is absolutely locked in.' Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: 'Yes.' Journalist: 'There are no circumstances under which you would seek to roll back stage 3?' Prime Minister Anthony Albanese: 'No, no circumstances.' He didn't say, 'Maybe some circumstances.' The Prime Minister should not have to break an election commitment to deal with a cost-of-living crisis that he and his government have created. That fact is that what they're delivering here is diddly squat. That's what it is. It's $804, when most people in my electorate have seen their expenses go up by $8,000. We'll come back to that. My speech today for the people of Petrie is a little bit about 1) integrity—I've outlined that the Prime Minister has none, which is very clear from his quotes and his commitment before the election; 2) Stage 3—the reality of who gets what; 3) Cost of living under this Labor government is woeful; and 4) what lies will this government tell next? What will they come after next, and what will that mean to you? The reality is that in my electorate of Petrie 12,272 people will get nothing; they have no income. They might be retired; they might be students; if they're over 18—12,272 people will get nothing. There are 46,000 people that earn between $18,200 and $45,000. There are 55,000 people that earn between $45,000 and $135,000. They will get a further $804 tax cut from what the coalition had already legislated. When I say 'legislated', right now, on this day, in Australia, the law of the land is that from 1 July, for those who earn between $45,000 and $200,000, the income tax rate will be 30 per cent. Most people think that's alright, because they think, 'If I'm earning a dollar, I'm happy to pay 30c and keep 70c.' That was the purpose of getting rid of the 37 per cent tax rate. But these people are bringing that back, another seven per cent for many people in my electorate—thousands of people. In fact, 2.1 million people in Australia will see tax hikes from the Albanese Labor government. They're increasing their tax. If they earn $135,000 to $190,000, they're increasing their tax by seven per cent. The rate on income tax will go from 30 per cent, which is law today, to 37 per cent. Seven per cent is $70 on every thousand in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, in the middle of a homelessness issue. Homelessness, since this government has been elected, has probably doubled—we won't find out until the 2026 census. The 45 per cent rate will now increase to cover those on $190,000 to $200,000. They went to the election promising a 30 per cent rate. Instead, on that $10,000, they're going to take $1,500 back off them. That's the reality. When I talk to people in my electorate that earn under $45,000, I explain to them that their tax rate is 19 cents on the dollar. Their first $18,200 is tax free. Then it's 19 cents on the dollar from $18,200 to $45,000. Most people say: 'That's fair. I'm happy to pay my 19 cents and keep 81 cents.' But what this government is doing, to be tricky, to be smart, to try to give everyone a big $804 tax cut, is saying 'We're going to reduce your tax to 16 cents.' Alright, you're going to reduce it to 16 cents, but that wasn't the tax rate that was the big issue. Most people are happy to pay 19 cents. What the government won't tell those in Petrie and those in the gallery and others is that they'd already taken $1,500 off most people that earn under $120,000, after they came to government. In May 2022, when the election was on, the low-income and middle-income tax offset delivered $1,500 to most people earning under $120,000 in their tax return. So, you rock on up to your accountant and get $1,500 back. Guess what happened last year with this mob? That's gone now. That's all gone. So, people were having to pay, in some cases, additional dollars, having to pay the ATO more money, and in other cases they had a measly little tax return when they were expecting $1,500 more. The Albanese Labor government want to tell you: 'We're reducing the 19 cents to 16 cents. You'll get $804, but we've already taken $1,500 off you. So you are $700 worse off there. Then the cost of living has gone through the roof, which everybody knows about. Groceries are up by nine per cent. Housing costs are up by 12 per cent and people are homeless under this mob. Electricity bills are up by 20 per cent, when another Albanese Labor government promise was that they would reduce your electricity bills by $275—instead they've gone up 20 per cent with all their renewable energy rollout. Those that own a home or have to insure a car know that insurance is up by 22 per cent. How much longer do you want to put up with this bloke? You need to toss out the Albanese Labor government come the next election. You want to cook a barbecue or heat your shower with gas? It's 27 per cent up. That's not a little bit—it's a lot more than $804, because that's all you're getting. Every single person in Australia needs to know that any that tax cut they receive on 1 July this year is because of the former coalition government. Do you think this mob would give you any tax cuts if it wasn't for the coalition government and what we had legislated? All they're doing is using con, spin and trickery. You can't believe a word that the Treasurer says, what the Prime Minister says or what the Minister for Finance. I forgot about the Minister for Finance in the Senate, Senator Katy Gallagher. On 6 January—less than a month ago—the journalist says, 'Minister, can you guarantee that all workers, even those on the highest income will get their full stage 3 tax cut from 1 July?' Minister Gallagher, leader in the Senate along with Minister Wong, said, 'Well, our position on the tax cuts hasn't changed.' They were doing this work back in November. This woman is in cabinet. She's either lying or she doesn't know what is going on. 'They're legislated,' says Minister Gallagher. 'They're due to come into effect from 1 July this year. The parliament passed them in the last term.' Stephen Jones, the Assistant Treasurer opposite, on 29 November said, 'We are always looking at ways to find savings in the budget and we're looking at that, but there has been no consideration on stage 3 tax cuts.' You could go through every single one of them, and you can't believe a word they're saying. You cannot believe them. To the backbenchers opposite, in their first term and all excited to be here: Guess what? You got elected on the back of a lie. Don't bother telling your electorates everyone's bet better off, because, if you were honest, you'd say: 'We're giving you 804 bucks. Your cost of living has gone up by $8,000. We've removed LMITO. And for any other tax cut you've got, you can thank Scott Morrison'—or the member for Cook, I should say—because that's the reality. These tax cuts were delivered by the coalition. They were meant to kill bracket creep. All the public servants here that are on $200,000 a year—guess what? All their housing costs have gone up, too. We're not going to forget them. You were meant to get a tax cut, and this mob has taken it back off you. They're increasing your tax by seven per cent if you earn over $135,000 and by 15 per cent if you earn over $190,000. And you want this guy in! Get rid of him! Honestly, they're no good and they want to keep people down. That's the reality of this government. They want to keep people down. They do not want to have people aspire to do more with their lives. That is the absolute reality. Bracket creep was very important to get rid of. The former coalition government was completely removing the 37 per cent rate. A member opposite—I think it was the member for Bennelong—got up yesterday and said: 'People earning $200,000 and people earning $45,000 are all paying the same rates of tax. That's not fair. We're bringing back the 37 per cent rate.' That guy got elected on a lie as well. What he didn't tell you is that someone earning $199,000 on the current law of the land that kicks in on 1 July pays $30,000 more tax than someone earning $99,000. He forgot that inconvenient point! It is sad that we have to be here to debate this, because this is a blatant lie from the Albanese Labor government. In my 10 years in parliament, I've told the truth. I've been straight with people. When people look me in the eye when I'm out and about in the Petrie electorate, around Redcliffe or North Lakes or Griffin or Deception Bay or down in Brisbane City Council, I tell them the truth. They ask me; they get a straight answer. This mob looked down the barrel and just completely lied. To every single one of these backbenchers who gets up and does a speech: you can keep telling yourself that, but the reality is that you've been elected under a lie. We won't forget it. We will continue to make sure that we hold this mob to account. Mr Giles 243609 How are you going to vote? Mr HOWARTH 247742 I understand the member opposite asked me how we're going to vote. We'll vote for these changes for this reason—I'll explain to you why. I told you that part. Hang on. It's because the $804 that will be given will benefit a lot of people, obviously. Because of the $8,000 that they've been hit with since you got into government, they're really struggling—really struggling every day. I put up posts on my social media. They are hurting right now. Your government needs to do better—a lot better. Are we happy about these changes? Of course we're not. But it's not the coalition that is bringing this bill forward. We've done what we thought was right. It's the Albanese Labor government that has broken their commitment, and every single one of them will have this on their record forever, and there's no escaping that. 12:43 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser We are debating the most important economic and social issue of this moment: the cost-of-living challenge that is facing so many people in our community. All of us across this chamber represent communities where cost-of-living challenges are the first-order issue discussed at the kitchen table every morning at breakfast. What this debate is really about—and I'm going to talk about some of the macro-economics and the numbers, but what this debate is really about—at its core, is two different approaches. We've just seen one approach from the member opposite who just spoke, and that is to approach this issue from the position of political posturing—to spend all of his time on faux outrage; to spend all of his time bloviating and expressing rhetoric upon rhetoric. But then, in the last 30 seconds—an incoherent 30 seconds—he spoke on why it is that they're going to support the whole thing anyway! How could we take seriously the 14½ minutes of rhetoric before that, when those opposite are going to vote for all of this? He said that part of the reason they're going to vote for it is that the people who will be getting the $800-plus need it, in the midst of this cost-of-living crisis, which is exactly at the core of why we're doing it. Let's be very clear: those opposite are using this as an opportunity for political posturing, first and foremost. We are hearing almost no reason for opposing this bill from those opposite—I'd say none, from the last few contributions that I've heard. They're using this as an opportunity for pure politics. I say: don't listen to the words that come out of their red, contorted, angry faces during this debate; look at the way they vote. That will tell you everything. In contrast, we are bringing a constructive, well-calibrated policy response to a very complicated situation, one that is very necessary and one that this House needs to pass urgently. I want to take a step back for a minute. What is the challenge that we are dealing with? The challenge is a cost-of-living crisis that had its beginnings in the global economic shocks arising from the war in Ukraine and the post-COVID supply chain problems, which led to a global surge in inflation. Over the past 18 months that has rippled through our economy, as it has in every other major OECD economy. That has manifested in supermarket prices and the cost of services. It has also manifested in rising interest rates, which is one of the strategies to deal with this crisis, but that in turn has hit households through higher mortgage costs and in other ways, indirectly, such as rents. We can all agree that, in all these different ways, households have felt cost-of-living pressure, arising from the global inflation challenge. This government has already responded in a range of ways. In its first two budgets it had a whole raft of measures—$20 billion plus—that benefited those in our community who are most in need. There was rent support, cheaper medicines, bill relief, and on and on it went. What I want to talk about now is the fact that this evolution of this cost-of-living crisis has taken paths that have nuances that require additional support, on top of what the government has already provided. One aspect of the evolution of the cost-of-living crisis over the last 12-plus months is that, as we've found from data that the Treasury has provided to us, working households have been affected by cost-of-living pressures more than other cohorts in the community, through mortgages, transport costs and a range of other costs. That's something important to bear in mind. Inflation is not passing through the economy uniformly; working households are being disproportionately affected. Secondly, when one breaks the community into quintiles, it is the lowest quintile that is being affected the most. In some senses that oughtn't surprise us, but when one actually looks at the data—and, again, this comes through in the Treasury briefing—what we find is that the lowest quintile is dissaving at a very significant rate. The rate of saving steps up with each of the higher quintiles, from the second through to the fifth. This means that the cohort of low- and medium-income working households need particular assistance, particularly in light of the fact that the previous stage 3 tax cuts—the Morrison stage 3 tax cuts—offered absolutely nothing to those earning between $18,000 and $45,000. The cost-of-living crisis was falling disproportionately on low- and medium-income working households, which the modelling shows were dissaving the most due to being hit the hardest, and they were going to get absolutely nothing from the tax cuts that were passed five years ago. Clearly a policy change, a policy recalibration, was needed. The challenge is: what we do about that? How do we change the targeting of benefits in such a way that it reflects our better understanding of the evolution of the cost-of-living challenges? How do we do so in a way that helps those most in need? How do we do so in a way that is non-inflationary and that also builds in structural reform? I'm now going to step through the fact that what we are offering—and what those opposite are going to vote for—ticks all of those boxes. It is important policy. It is first-order policy for households that are struggling. It is good policy and it is also urgent, and that's why this House should pass it soon. Firstly, what we've found, as I've outlined before, is that those on low incomes are being disproportionately affected by the cost-of-living increases. Inflation is not falling evenly across our community. What we'll find with our recalibrated tax changes is that those on incomes of 130K or less are going to get over $800 more than they would have before. Some of those opposite almost act as though $800 is nothing. It doesn't correct for everything that's gone on but, proportionately, it's a lot. It's $800 more than what would have got under those opposite, so it's hardly something to snipe at. Secondly, what we're doing addresses the issue of structural reform in a substantive way. We've all heard about this issue of bracket creep, and I just want to step through it momentarily. What we are doing increases two of the key bracket thresholds that are the subject of so much of this discussion. The bracket threshold for the 37 per cent rate will increase from $120,000 to $135,000. The bracket threshold for the top marginal rate will increase from $180,000 to $190,000. In that way, this tax package that is being offered to this parliament does change the thresholds in a way that is responsible and affordable. Reducing the rate for earnings between $18,000 and $45,000 from 19 per cent to 16 per cent is critically important in terms of bracket creep, because that affects the average rate paid for a very significant cohort of taxpayers. Indeed, the Treasury modelling found that the reduction of that 19 per cent tax rate to 16 per cent will see a smaller increase in average tax rates for the first seven quintiles over the next 10 years. So that is absolutely critical in that we'll see a very significant proportion of taxpayers benefit in the extent to which their average tax rate is affected as their incomes increase. This goes to this rhetorical point of aspiration. Those opposite seem to think that the only changes in the tax system that address aspiration are those that affect the top tax rate. In fact, changes to tax rates right up and down the schedule affect people's aspirations—people who are trying to do better, people who are trying to reduce the burdens on their families and people who are trying to increase their after-tax pay. It's a ridiculous framing of aspiration to suggest that anything other than changing the top tax rate has nothing to do with aspiration. Something that reduces the average tax paid for seven cohorts, as Treasury modelling indicates, is a very significant way of enhancing and promoting aspiration in our economy and our society. Thirdly, the tax changes that we are putting forward will have a significant benefit for young people who are taxpayers and for women. This is something which is critically important for groups that are particularly disadvantaged by the cost-of-living changes. And it's also particularly important for my next point, which is labour supply, which interacts with the aspiration point. What is critically important in the design of this tax change is that it's going to be far more effective in encouraging and incentivising labour force supply in the economy. We know that marginal tax rates have an effect on people's willingness to supply their labour; that is something which is very intuitive. But a number of studies have shown that this isn't even across all taxpayers. In fact, some of the most responsive people to changes in marginal tax rates are those on low or medium incomes; many of the studies have shown that it's often women—low skilled and low income, or medium skilled and medium income women—who are the most responsive. That's partly because they're often part-time and have more flexibility, and it's partly due to other behavioural characteristics and preferences. What is clear is that changing the tax rates in our package—in particular, changing the 19 per cent tax rate to 16 per cent—is going to have a very significant impact on labour supply. The Treasury modelling suggests that the package that is being offered today versus the original Morrison package will see an extra 930,000 hours offered per week in the labour market compared to the previous offering, which is a very significant change. It will be, in many cases, women working in the care economy and retail who need more hours, who are now going to be incentivised to work more and who will bring home more money for their families and boost the living standards and after-tax income of those families. So this is a very significant change. Fifthly, and related to that point, is the fact that this tax change will be non-inflationary because it's revenue neutral and it is going to increase the labour supply. In increasing the labour supply, it's going to have important benefits for the labour market at a time when parts of our labour market are under constraints. So this important piece of policy is extremely urgent, given the cost-of-living pressures that so many people in our community are facing, and it ticks all the boxes that I talked about before. It's going to give extra assistance to those that need it most, and it's going to do so in a way that is non-inflationary and provides structural reform. But, of course, this is not just about all of the macroeconomic aggregates, as important as they are. This is also about the people that we see in the street every day, like the people in Fraser that I've talked to since this policy was announced and who have uniformly supported it as something they desperately need. In my electorate, 78,000 people will receive a tax cut, but 68,000 people will receive a bigger tax cut under the revised tax cuts than the ones that the Morrison government had brought in. In Fraser, 87 per cent of taxpayers are getting a bigger tax cut, and many of them, in proportional terms, are getting a substantially bigger tax cut. In Fraser, health care and social assistance is the largest employing industry, and, in that industry, 97 to 98 per cent of workers will be better off under our plan. These are the people who were thanked by so many in this place after the pandemic and these are the people who continue to do so much important hard and difficult work in our community that is often not that well remunerated. These are the people for whom we fought for wage increases through strengthening IR laws, increasing the minimum wage and increasing payments for wages and conditions for people in the aged-care industry. We've been doing all we can in terms of their wages, but these people will also rightly benefit from a materially bigger tax cut of at least $800 more. That will make a real difference to those families and those people who work in the healthcare industry, the social assistance industry and so many other industries, including people in retail, people who drive trucks, people who work in the transport industry—the list goes on. These are people who have been doing it so tough for 18 months. What is clear is that if we had gone ahead with the package the Morrison government legislated all those years ago, which was now not fit for purpose, so many of the people that I just talked about would have received no benefits at all in the upcoming budget, or far too little. This revised tax package will fix that. It does so in a way that is financially responsible, through good and well-designed policy that fits the needs of the day, and that is structural reform that will build in long-term benefits. It's for those reasons why those opposite will vote for this, and it's for those reasons why all of us on this side will also vote for this package. 12:58 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin I rise to speak in support of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, but I'd also like to take this opportunity to talk about what this bill isn't. This bill is not substantive tax reform and is not a response to an unsustainable tax system. It's not addressing intergenerational wealth problems or the open question of how we're going to pay for our essential services in the coming decades. This bill is cost-of-living relief. It makes changes to how the stage 3 tax cuts are implemented in response to a changing economic environment, but, in the long term, we need actual tax reform. What's happened since this bill has been announced? Much of the commentary has been focused on the politics—the broken promise, the honesty and the lies. Much of the media has focused on the votes, the wedge and the furore. I understand that people don't like it when a promise is made and broken, but I believe governments need to be allowed to respond to changing circumstances and to lead when the going gets tough. Opponents and journalists love to play the 'rule in, rule out' game, where leaders are cornered into promising to never change something. But part of good leadership is not making promises that are so rigid you can't move when things change. I believe that in this particular case, the circumstances have changed. Thirteen interest rate increases is a change, and the global instability we see is also a change. We're not the only economy dealing with inflation. But that's the politics. As an independent, I'm here to focus on the policy and what's right for the country now, so that's what I'll do. The recent increases in the cost of living are affecting people in every income bracket. The government does need to act in these circumstances, but in a way that doesn't exacerbate inflation. Reshaping these tax cuts seems like not a bad way to provide some relief at this stage. The injection of $20 billion into the economy had already been factored in, so the changes don't substantially add inflationary pressure. Under these changes, seven in every 10 taxpayers in Curtin will be better off. I recognise that this is frustrating and challenging for the three out of 10 in Curtin who were expecting a higher tax cut than the one they'll be getting. I've heard from constituents who were counting on the change, include a single working mother who carries the burden of her household and her child. Despite earning a decent salary, the cost-of-living pressures have had a huge impact on her. She made financial decisions based on the promise that stage 3 tax cuts would be delivered. I heard from another couple in their early 30s who have rented for the past nine years and saved, and have now been able to buy their first home. The result of the changes will be that they have less income than expected, and it will be harder for them to make other significant decisions in their lives, such as starting a family. These stories are real and should not be discounted. Many constituents who have contacted me have acknowledged that they are lucky to be in a position where their hard work is rewarded by a higher salary and where they are still able to put food on the table. One couple told me that they would have benefited from the stage 3 tax cuts in their original form, but believe it's the right decision to make amendments to respond to the cost-of-living needs of lower- and middle-income earners. I've also heard stories from several constituents in the 70 per cent who will benefit more, who are so relieved to be receiving an extra cut that will ease the spike they're experiencing in household expenditure or that will otherwise take care of a specific bill that's weighing on their minds. For these people, this change is very welcome news. The benefit of the reshaped cuts is, in fact, shared pretty fairly, with everyone on an income between $60,000 and $210,000 getting a cut to their effective tax rate of between two and three percentage points. Under the previously legislated stage 3 tax cuts, this was less than one percentage point for people earning less than $70,000 and more than four percentage points for people earning more than $190,000. This package also seems to be a fairly well-targeted package to drive greater workforce participation. It's heartening to see that 90 per cent of women are likely to benefit from these changes. The way the cuts are now shaped, it's likely to have the biggest workforce participation effect for women who are deciding whether to return to work for that extra day or two. I've been in that position myself, weighing up the additional cost of child care and the extra pay for an extra day of work balanced against the extra logistics and the risk of kids getting sick and not being able to go to child care—trying to work out if it's actually worth working more. I believe that the modelling of the effect of these redesigned tax cuts on workforce participation shows an expected impact of the equivalent of an extra 24,000 full-time workers, which is very welcome in the current environment. Many of these jobs will be in the care sector, where we desperately need a boost to the workforce. Of course not everyone earns an income and pays tax, so not everyone benefits from a tax cut. Those on a disability support pension, JobSeeker or an age pension are still seeing the seven per cent increase in the cost of groceries and a 10 per cent increase in rents. The government will need to find different ways to provide them with some cost-of-living relief, through addressing health costs or other essentials. The Medicare levy adjustment announced this week does provide some additional relief to more than a million lower-earning Australians. But, as I said at the outset, this bill is not really about substantive long-term tax reform. It provides cost-of-living relief. The previously legislated stage 3 tax cuts were pitched as addressing bracket creep. Now, I completely agree that we need to address bracket creep, but there is actually only one way to address bracket creep properly, and that's to index our tax brackets. With indexed tax brackets, successive governments wouldn't be able to treat the hidden additional revenue as accountability-free pocket money or demonstrate periodic largesse. Any decision to spend more would need to be made explicitly, with clear trade-offs and with the permission of the electorate. Unfortunately, there is pretty much no chance that we'll see this amendment, because it serves neither major party. Both parties value the fact that they will be given access to additional tax revenue when they're in government. A stalemate over genuine tax reform has evolved between the major parties over the last 30 years, with ideology overriding facts and evidence. Every Australian loses because of this. Our tax system's robustness is in continual decline, which increasingly undermines our ability to provide essential services and a reasonable social safety net at both the federal level and the state and territory level. Political leaders are hamstrung by their legacies of promises not to touch anything, so we end up tinkering around the edges. Tax policy cannot be taboo. We must design the tax system we need for the next few decades. So what needs to change? In short, I think the following things need to be back on the table. We need to reduce our reliance on personal income tax. With an aging population, we're placing an increasing burden on a decreasing proportion of the population. When I was born, there were more than seven Australians of working age for each person over 65. This has now declined from seven to about four. This is not sustainable. We also need to increase GST on a broader base. Compared to other countries, we charge GST on fewer things and at a lower level. But if we change this, we will need an appropriate redistribution so that it's not regressive. We need to earn appropriate value from our natural resources. We collectively own our natural resources, and we should be paid appropriately for them if we let companies export them. There was no tax paid on two-thirds of the gas exported from WA last year. In 2025-26, PRRT revenue is forecast to be worth only 0.08 per cent of GDP. We need to simplify the tax system. Our tax system contains numerous complexities that provide the wrong incentives or are a drag on productivity. We need to get back to first principles and decide what behaviours we want to incentivise more or less of, and structure our tax system accordingly. In summary, I support the cost-of-living support delivered by this reshaping of the stage 3 tax cuts, because it is fair, is likely to stimulate greater workforce participation, particularly for women, and is much needed at the moment. But I challenge the government to be brave, to look more broadly at our tax system and to take on the challenge of working out how we will pay for the things we think we deserve as we get older, as decarbonisation puts our exports at risk, as our productivity continues to decline and as people in their 20s see owning a house as increasingly out of reach. These challenges won't go away, and I think Australia wants to see leaders willing to face them head on rather than hiding their heads in the sand. 13:08 Dr REID 300126 Robertson From the outset, I want to thank the member for Fraser and the member for Curtin for the civilised debate that was conducted in the last half an hour. I think that that's the way this chamber should be conducted. But there was a member previous to that, raising their voice and using political posturing and rhetoric against our dynamic economic policy, and I was really saddened and disappointed by some of the statements made by the member for Petrie just earlier. The member was disappointed in Labor's dynamic economic policy in this Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. The member was disappointed that this legislation will give every Australian taxpayer a tax cut. This is alongside the major cost-of-living policies and initiatives that the Albanese Labor government has put in place since we were elected in 2022. I am talking about things like cheaper child care. The member for Dobell is here in this chamber at the moment. Across the Central Coast, we talking about nearly 14,000 families who are going to be benefiting from our cheaper childcare policy. We look at the tripling of the bulk-billing incentive. We have had major increases in our bulk-billing rates on the Central Coast, including an additional 10,000 visits to the GP. Bulk billing was in decline prior to that and now it is on the road to recovery. To the opening of the bulk-billed urgent care centres, they are completely bulk-billed for every human being who walks through the door and that is how it should be in Australia with our health care. The member for Higgins also brought up something which I can definitely relate to—that is, when the circumstances of a patient who may present at a hospital change then you need to adopt your clinical priorities and also your clinical treatment plan, as I know other members in the chamber he would know. For example, if a patient comes into the emergency department hypotensive—low blood pressure—you don't stand there with your hands in your pocket; you give them IV fluid. Or take for example a patient with an infection. You have started some antibiotics, whether that be through a drip or in a tablet. If you get some testing back and find that that bug is resistant to that antibiotic, you change the antibiotic. Alternatively, if you have a patient with kidney failure, renal failure, stop or adjust the medications that are cleared by the kidneys. These are simple clinical examples. These are examples I use every day when I'm practising in the emergency department, and the same can be said here. This is a dynamic policy that will help every single Australian, every single Australian. It gives every single Australian a tax cut, it helps with their cost of living and it also let's them have more of what they earn in their own pockets. The federal Labor government is laser focused on helping reduce the cost of living for all Australians, not just some. This week we have introduced Labor's tax cut legislation which will provide tax cuts and cost-of-living relief from 1 July. These tax cuts will deliver relief that is fiscally responsible and that does not add to inflationary pressures. Our tax cuts, as I have said multiple times now, in the tree minutes that I've spoken mean that every Australian taxpayer will receive a tax cut, especially helping low- and middle-income Australians the most. It is a plan for tax relief and it is a plan for tax reform. These tax cuts are not just good for low- and middle-income Australians. They are good for women, they are good for helping with cost-of-living pressures, they are good for labour supply, they are good for the economy and, most importantly they are good for the people of Robertson on the Central Coast. That's right, all 66,000 taxpayers in my electorate of Robertson on the New South Wales Central Coast will receive a tax cut. Of these 66,000 hardworking taxpayers, 56,000 people will receive a greater tax cut with Labor's plan compared to what was originally legislated by the former Morrison government. On average, taxpayers in Robertson will receive a tax cut that is equal to approximately $1,580, and 85 per cent of taxpayers in Robertson will now be better off under Labor's plan. This is relief that will assist single parents, couples and families managing growing living pressures right across our beautiful region. Around 83 per cent of taxpayers in New South Wales will receive a bigger tax cut thanks to our economic plan. When the former coalition government legislated its stage 3 tax cuts five years ago, the world was a very, very different place before a once in a 100-year pandemic, persistent inflation, higher interest rates, two conflicts and global uncertainty put Australians under more sustained cost-of-living pressures. When the circumstances change, changing policy is the responsible thing to do and that is exactly what this government, this side of the House, is doing. The change of policy may not have been the easiest decision but it is the right decision to make for the circumstances that we are in. Cost of living is a significant issue for our community on the Central Coast. A competent government listens and adapts to make things better when needed. Addressing cost-of-living pressures is my No. 1 priority, and, when economic circumstances change, the right thing to do is adapt your economic policy. Labor's tax cuts will mean 13.6 million Australian taxpayers will receive a tax cut from 1 July, and 2.9 million Australian taxpayers will also now receive a tax cut thanks to Labor's plan, compared to what was legislated under the former Morrison government five years ago. If you look at how the Australian people are receiving our tax cuts plan in the media—and I've been out doorknocking and phone banking—you'll see that 62 per cent of Australians support our plan for bigger tax cuts for more Australians, not just some. The Liberals and the Nationals and those in the media will do everything they can to undermine our plan, but the reality is that this is good and responsible economic policy that will help all Australians with the cost of living. The Australian people are not silly. They understand good economic policy when they see it, and they are supporting our plan. But don't just take it from me. Australian National University professor Ben Phillips said of Labor's tax cuts: 'Very much the support now is across the board rather than just at the very top. So that's good in terms of workforce participation, and it's also good in terms of cost-of-living relief. I think overall it's a fairer package.' Australia Institute Executive Director Richard Denniss said, 'Anthony Albanese's decision to recast Scott Morrison's 2018 tax cuts to suit the economy of 2024 is the biggest and most honest piece of tax reform in Australia for decades.' Across Australia, the people who will benefit the most from our tax cuts are those in our communities such as nurses, teachers and truck drivers, where 95 per cent will now receive a bigger tax cut from 1 July. Essential workers, who we rely on every day to care, to teach and to supply our communities, were hit hard during the pandemic, and now they can expect a bigger tax cut under Labor's responsible economic policy. I am proud to say that there are many other Australian workers who will be better off under this legislation than they would have been under the legislation five years ago. Ninety-seven per cent of Australia's 150,000 aged-care workers and disability carers will now receive a greater tax cut. Ninety-seven per cent of Australia's 310,000 registered nurses will now receive a greater tax cut. Ninety-six per cent of Australia's 100,000 commercial cleaners will now receive a greater tax cut. Ninety-seven per cent of Australia's 140,000 early childhood educators will now receive a greater tax cut. Our plan will also see those taxpayers earning $45,000 or less receiving a tax cut. This was not the case under those opposite. This change will significantly boost the take-home pay of Australians on modest incomes and people working part time. These are Australians who might be studying at university, single parents and older Australians, who will all now be better off under the plan that is being implemented by the Albanese Labor government. For a family on an average household income of around $130,000, with one partner earning $80,000 and the other earning $50,000, their combined tax cut will be over $2,600, which is about $50 a week and $1,600 more than they would have got under the old plan. Don't just take it from me. Last week I was doorknocking in my electorate right across the area but in particular in the areas of Avoca Beach and Umina Beach as well. The No. 1 issue that was being raised with me was the cost of living and the pressures being faced by families on the Central Coast. That is why the federal Labor government is giving all Australian taxpayers a tax cut and providing a bigger tax cut to low- and middle-income earners. The opposition and those in the media will say that our plan to give all Australians a tax cut and bigger tax cuts does not address bracket creep. According to Treasury, this is not the case, and those opposite and in the media would benefit from reading the Treasury advice that has been made public. If they are unable to find that advice, please email my office and I will send you a copy. It says that our plan distributes the future impact of bracket creep more evenly. Our tax cuts deliver a better, more progressive tax system which addresses bracket creep. Further, Treasury estimates that our tax cuts will increase labour supply by around 930,000 hours per week, which is more than double the labour supply impact of the former coalition government's plan, and our tax cuts will boost productivity and strengthen the Australian economy. On Labor's tax cuts, Westpac's economic spokesperson, Luci Ellis, said: While the changes this week alter the distribution of the benefits, the macroeconomic impact of this—relative to the package as originally announced—is marginal. We do not expect that this will affect the RBA's view of the inflation outlook or the future path of the cash rate. In other words: Labor's tax cuts will not add to inflation, and the RBA expects the inflation rate to continue to fall and to return to the target band, which is in line with Treasury's forecasts. The federal Labor government is building on the existing cost-of-living relief measures that we have implemented since we were elected in 2022. I touched on some of them earlier in my speech, but let's go through them again, because they are all relevant to this speech and to some previous. They include making it easier to see a doctor, through Labor's Medicare urgent care clinics. These are bulk-billed walk-in clinics with extended operating hours—if you're too sick for the GP and not sick enough for the emergency department—to take pressure off our hospitals. It's a signature policy and a signature initiative that would only have been possible under an Albanese Labor government. We delivered energy bill relief, assisting eligible Australians with their energy costs; cheaper child care, helping one million Australian families afford early childhood education and care; fee-free TAFE, ensuring hundreds of thousands of Australians can afford to upskill and get well-paid jobs; cheaper medicines, by reducing the price of PBS medications; an increase in rental assistance, increasing it to its highest level in 30 years; and an expansion and strengthening of paid parental leave. The federal Labor government will continue to help reduce the cost of living for all Australians. I am pleased to be part of a mature, competent federal government that is governing for all Australians, not just some. We are making the necessary reforms to position Australia on strong foundations and we're not leaving any Australians behind. I want to thank the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, for his leadership and conviction, making the right decision in the challenging circumstances that are affecting our country, affecting my state and affecting our electorates. I also want to thank the Treasurer, Dr Jim Chalmers, for his work ensuring Labor's tax cuts are equitable and deliver the greatest cost-of-living relief for middle Australia. 13:22 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra Australians face scams every day—scams that are there to deceive Australians. The scammer makes a promise to give something or to do something or pretends to be something other than what they are. Often they deceive people into believing that the scammer is actually helping them. Despite the red flags, the scammer keeps promising there's nothing to fear and there's nothing wrong. People put their trust in the scammer, and then it's too late: the scammer has taken them for a ride and disappeared. Today we're not debating an online scam but an electoral scam. Anthony Albanese promised the stage 3 tax cuts over 100 times. Labor had voted for these tax cuts in this parliament. The tax cuts were taken to the Australian people by both sides. In 2019, under Bill Shorten, Labor was very honest about its tax plans, and Australians rejected them. Had Labor under Anthony Albanese in 2022 been as honest, they may have been rejected again. But Australians believed Labor, and they believed Anthony Albanese when he said, 'My word is my bond.' Then his word wasn't his bond and he pocketed $28 billion in extra taxes. To be fair to the Prime Minister, he wasn't the only one. His ministers all lined up to celebrate the broken promise. The teals also broke their promises. I've heard many of their arguments. The word 'fairness' comes up a lot. Do you know what the fairest thing you can do is? Keep your word and keep your promises to Australians. Australians are right to feel disappointed in a prime minister and in a government that says one thing and does another. Australians have learnt that you can't trust the Labor Party when it comes to taxes. Paul Keating had his l-a-w law tax cuts that were never delivered, and Julia Gillard said there would be no carbon tax under the government she led. Now Anthony Albanese has broken a word which he once said was his bond. No-one questions that Australians are facing difficult times. Because of this government, Australians are facing the most financial pressure since the Keating recession of the 1990s. True, unemployment continues at historic lows; yet the economic hamster-wheel is getting faster and faster. Under this government, real net disposable income per person has fallen 8.6 per cent. The official figures reflect what Australians are feeling in their wallets. Under this government, food's gone up nine per cent, electricity's up 23 per cent and gas is up 29 per cent. This is despite the fact that we have a Prime Minister who'd promised to reduce power bills by $275. And it's the home where the pain is. For home owners, it's the pain of a dozen interest rate rises under this government, meaning that a family with a $750,000 mortgage are paying an extra $24,000 a year. Renters—who are often young or the most economically vulnerable—are feeling the pain of the largest increase in almost 15 years. Bracket creep, interest rate increases, energy costs, inflation and falling real wages have all taken their toll. For an average income earner, this is a decline in take-home pay of the order of $8,000. It's worth recording that, under Labor's policy, a worker on an average wage would receive only $804 a year—a fraction of what they lost. It must be noted that, under this package, in its entirety, taxpayers lose. Labor's tax package increases the tax take over 10 years by $28 billion. We know that this tax package is a test case for Labor breaking further promises after the next election. Over the last two years, we have seen very deliberate language around the stage 3 tax cuts: 'There are no plans;' 'It's legislated;' 'Our position hasn't changed'—cute forms of words, always delivered with a touch of indignation when the ministers or the Prime Minister would be questioned. Now we'll hear the same form of words for negative gearing, for superannuation, for family trusts and for death duties over the next 18 months. The opposition knows how much Australians are hurting. It's why we will not stand in the way of these tax cuts. But Australians are paying a terrible price for the inflationary largesse of state, territory and federal Labor governments and the lack of any long-term economic plan from the Treasurer. I applaud people studying and learning. The Treasurer might have studied and written a thesis on the reforms of the eighties and nineties—and I applaud that, too; I really do—but he hasn't done any thinking about the 2020s and the 2030s. We must look forward, not look back. Today, I want to add two reflections to this debate about where we're heading. The first is that we need to recentre the economic debate of this country on the matters that will grow and prosper Australia. All too often we've let the economic policy levers be driven by a desire to alleviate economic symptoms Australians face, rather than to address the causes. This is a government focused on dishing out panadol for pain rather than surgery for a cure. It's about winning a news poll rather than building for a generation. Let's speak the truth that too few want acknowledged. The Australian economy's not working as it should. The fact that Australian wages aren't buying as much as they used to is not a cause of our economic malaise; it's a symptom. It's a symptom of our loss of competitiveness and productivity. The fact that power bills are going up and up won't be answered by temporary relief, but by a reform of energy markets and a serious debate about our energy mix where nothing, including nuclear power, is off the table. There's the fact that investment in major projects is being stymied because this government has fed and encouraged activist groups. Lawfare is stymieing jobs, investment, productivity and national income. The Attorney-General won't resolve issues around legal standing, which is enabling political activists to disrupt the economic progress of this country. There's also a truth whispered among parents. Though most of them love their children's school and appreciate the care and dedication of their teachers, there's a deep fear our education system—primary, secondary and tertiary—is not preparing young people for the workforce they will face. Australia's skill needs are not being met. In so many places we've settled for a status quo economy that worked for the 1980s but is not working for the 2020s and will fail in the 2030s. Our biggest businesses—be they supermarkets, telcos, banks or airlines—are settled up in cosy relationships which hinder growth and innovation. We need the ACCC to continue to put the supermarkets, the telcos, the banks and the airlines under the microscope, studying market structure, barriers to entry and how we can encourage more market players. Competition drives prices down and it drives innovation up. And we need a workplace relations system that doesn't treat those who create jobs like enemies and criminals instead of partners in building a positive, high-wage economy. We need to reset the economic discussion and build for a new economic future. Policies are always underpinned by values, and those values matter. When it comes to the economy, we must always encourage aspiration, because it's aspiration that encourages every Australian to participate, to contribute, to give it a go and to do their best. Aspiration is a virtue. It's the optimism expressing itself through our labour, which is the gift we all bring to our workplaces. From young people contemplating decisions about skills and study, to older people thinking about taking on extra work, aspiration matters. When an Australian makes a decision— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43 and may be resumed at a later hour. Member for Berowra, your speech was interrupted; you will be granted leave to continue when the debate is resumed. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 19 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Western Australia: Hospitals 19 13:30 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning The hospital system in Western Australia is in crisis. Today, I rise for the 10th time in this place to call on WA Premier, Roger Cook, and his Labor MPs to do their jobs and fix our health system. Last week, data released by the Productivity Commission revealed that WA is the worst in the nation when it comes to seeing urgent patients on time. Only 32 per cent of ED patients were seen on time, and it's almost half the national average of 58 per cent. Of course, this will be no surprise to Western Australians. Labor's healthcare record in WA, particularly in the Peel region, is a disaster. In 2016, the year before the election of WA Labor, ambulance ramping at the Peel Health Campus, my local hospital, was a total of 178 hours. Last year, after nearly seven years of Labor, ramping exploded 1,500 per cent to 2,820 hours. That's a total of 117 days that patients spent on an ambulance stretcher, waiting for a bed in the Peel Health Campus emergency department. There's a question that people in the Peel region need to ask: are they better off after seven years of WA Labor? I think the answer must be no. I want to make clear, though, that my concerns do not lie with our dedicated doctors, nurses and hospital staff; we have some of the best in the world. They go above and beyond, but they need the best resources they can get to care for our community. That's why I'm calling on Premier Roger Cook and WA Labor to get on with the job, because right now they have failed us. Black Saturday Bushfires 19 13:31 Ms FERNANDO 299964 Holt Yesterday, we commemorated 15 years since one of Australia's worst disasters: the Black Saturday bushfires. The day 7 February 2009 is etched in our memory. It is a day that forever changed the landscape of our nation and the lives of so many. Today we remember the people whose lives were lost and their families and friends, who endured such grief. We remember the communities that were reduced to ash and the resilience and enduring spirit that defines us as Australians. I visited Marysville with my family a few weeks after the bushfires had subsided to support the small businesses who were doing it tough in the aftermath. Their perseverance to make do and support their communities, even after such a disaster, will never be forgotten. Finally, we remember the firefighters, volunteers and everyday heroes who courageously battled the flames, saving countless lives while they risked their own. I want to conclude by extending my gratitude to the fire service staff and volunteers in Holt—namely those at FRV Fire Station 92, Hampton Park, Narre Warren, Clyde, Devon Meadows, Tooradin and Warneet-Blind Bight Fire Brigade CFA. Lindsay Electorate 19 13:33 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay The Lindsay team and I have been making thousands of calls—from Luddenham to Londonderry, from Emu Heights to Colyton—about issues that matter most. The No. 1 issue for people in my community is the cost of living. The second is energy costs, and the third is roads and infrastructure. The cost-of-living crisis impacting Western Sydney is immense. I'm so worried for low- and middle-income families, who are set to swap from low fixed mortgages to higher variable rates. Locals are facing the possibility of losing their family home. Our young people, families and seniors who rent are being slammed with higher rents due to interest rates. This summer has been hot. A few years ago, Penrith was the hottest place on the planet. Residents need air conditioning to cool down, or they will face health impacts. Rising costs of energy are taking a toll on families struggling to sleep through the warm nights and seniors who are at home during the day in sweltering heat. We face $5 billion of cuts from the Albanese Labor government for Western Sydney infrastructure. Locals are sick of being stuck in jams on Mulgoa Road, yet the government cut $200 million for Mulgoa Road, impacting so many local communities. Rising costs and infrastructure cuts will be the legacy of the Albanese Labor government in Western Sydney. Reid Electorate: Lunar New Year 20 13:34 Ms SITOU 298121 Reid Xinnian kuaile. Gongxi facai. Chuc mung nam moi. Saehae bok mani badeuseyo. Happy Lunar New Year! This is a tradition shared by so many cultures across Asia as well as throughout my electorate of Reid. During the month of February there will be celebrations in Rhodes, Burwood, Lidcombe, Homebush West and Wentworth Point. Growing up, I always loved this time of year. It meant time with family, lion-dancing, good food and red pockets. But it has taken on a new meaning for me now. As I attend celebrations across my electorate, I marvel at how diverse the crowds are. Lunar New Year in Australia has transcended the Korean, Chinese and Vietnamese communities. It's a tradition embraced by people from all backgrounds, and what a beautiful reflection that is of our multicultural story. Last Sunday, I accompanied the member for Strathfield, Jason Yat-Sen Li on a street walk with a difference, accompanied by lion dancers. We brought lions into businesses all up and down Burwood Road, sharing good fortune for the year ahead with the business owners. Over the next few weeks, I'll be attending many events across the electorate, to wish everyone good health and good fortune over this coming year. Refugee and Humanitarian Visas 20 13:36 Ms CHANEY 300006 Curtin Exactly a year and a day ago, I stood in parliament and shared the story of Jan Ali Haidari, a Hazara Afghani refugee who arrived in Australia in 2011. I said of Jan: He has been living in an endless cycle of uncertainty, with no way to plan for the future. At that point, Jan had been staying with one of my constituents, Marian Hillam, for six years, as he waited for a permanent visa so he could bring his family to Australia. Now, Jan has been staying with Marian for seven years. He has now been separated from his wife and four children for 12 years. He's still waiting for any news about his visa. He's still in limbo. In the last year, Jan and his supporters at the Nedlands Uniting Church have asked repeatedly for updates on his visa status. But Jan is still one of the 6,680 people waiting for a Resolution of Status visa that was promised by the government back in March 2023. There are another 9,000 people in limbo who are not part of the visa conversion process and still have no pathway to permanency. While I thank Minister Giles for his personal engagement, I strongly urge the government to commit the resources required so that people like Jan can finally have their Resolution of Status visas granted. Middle East 20 13:37 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle It was heartbreaking to learn this morning that the prospect of a ceasefire in the awful war in Gaza will not proceed at this time. It means more than 100 Israeli hostages remain in captivity. It's abhorrent that they were ever taken. They should have been freed unconditionally on the days since the Hamas terrorist attacks on 7 October. It means the unconscionable bombardment and suffering of the people of Gaza will continue, and that's unacceptable. Australia has joined other nations in calling on all sides to deliver a ceasefire. Every country has the right and the obligation to defend its citizens, but not every military action constitutes self-defence. The wholesale destruction of Gaza is not self-defence. Australia expects Israel to act in accordance with the ruling of the ICJ. The truth is that Gaza is being bombed into rubble, with 70 per cent of buildings damaged and the entire population being squeezed further and further south, in starvation conditions and without basic medical services. In Ukraine, a nation of 44 million, 10,000 civilians have been killed in the course of 24 months. In Gaza, a district of two million, 28,000 civilians have been killed in four months, two-thirds of whom are women and children. It is wrong and it has to stop. I will always be an advocate for peace and nonviolence and I will always be rigorously critical of military action, because history tells us that violence almost never solves anything. State sponsored violence almost always causes enormous, disproportionate harm to innocent people. Mental Health: Youth 21 13:39 Dr SCAMPS 299623 Mackellar The lack of adolescent mental health services on Sydney's northern beaches is a serious problem for my community. The number of 12 to 17-year-olds presenting to hospital EDs with self-harm injuries increased by nearly 50 per cent for the year to July 2021, compared to the same period in 2019. Pittwater also has one of the highest rates of suicide for those between the ages of 15 and 24 of anywhere in greater Sydney. It's higher than in the eastern suburbs, the shire, the inner west, Parramatta or Penrith. The northern beaches area is particularly at risk, with data indicating a shortfall of up to 145 acute mental health beds. So nearly two years ago the northern beaches community was extremely relieved when, following a number of critical incidents, the then Liberal state government announced $11 million to improve acute adolescent mental health services that would be provided at the Northern Beaches Hospital. Over $7 million of that amount was earmarked for a new four-bed adolescent mental health ward. As I said, this was extremely welcome news. The problem is that, now nearly two years on, the Northern Beaches Hospital has still refused to implement or establish this four-bed adolescent mental health ward. Why? Because the Northern Beaches Hospital is a public/private hospital. It's the only one left in New South Wales after failed experiments in previous places. I know that Rose Jackson, the state Minister for Mental Health, has tried very hard to resolve this issue, but she has no power to direct a private hospital. (Time expired) Spence Electorate: Ministerial Visit 21 13:40 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence If there's one thing I enjoy more than walking the streets of my electorate of Spence speaking to constituents and local business owners it is doing just that with the ministers of the Albanese Labor government. It's no secret that Spence has enjoyed quite a number of ministerial visits—something that I am extremely proud of. Last week was no different, when the Minister for Small Business, Homelessness and Housing answered the call and joined me in Gawler to meet with the vibrant business community. We were also joined by Damian McGee, who Gawler locals would know from the Exchange Hotel, but he's also the town of Gawler's Corporate Citizen of the Year. Thank you, Damian, for hosting us at the Exchange Hotel along with members of the Gawler Business Development Group to discuss all things small business. I'm sure the minister would agree that the discussion was robust, informative but also rewarding. It is vitally important that the government remains an active listener to our small business community to hear what matters to them. In Spence and across Australia, our small business community plays a vital role within our economy, and ensuring that small businesses remain not just viable but able to prosper is an aim that is front of mind for our government. They will always find an active listener in our government and with me as their local member. McMahon, Mr John, OAM 21 13:42 Mr HOGAN 218019 Page I would like to acknowledge and remember the incredible life of local cricket legend John McMahon. John recently passed away at the age of 91. Playing his first game of cricket at the age of nine in 1943, John continued playing until 2011, and he retired at the age of 79. He joined the Lismore Marist Brothers cricket team, and through his career there he took five wickets on more than 75 occasions and would go on with a number of other teams to take a total number of 120 five-wicket hauls across his career. Upon being selected for the northern New South Wales team, one of John's most satisfying achievements was playing against both the English and South African touring teams. After making a return to cricket at the age of 58 to help the struggling Wardell club in 1990, John took 130 wickets over the following four seasons. From serving as a regional director of coaching for the far north coast to being the personal coach in 1992 of Lyn Larsen, the Australian women's cricket team captain, John continued to prove his coaching ability off the field. Some of his most honoured achievements include being named Lismore Cricketer of the Year, earning two Sheffield Shield caps, being bestowed life membership of Cricket NSW and receiving an Order of Australia medal in 2008. I would like to express my condolences to Joan and the McMahon family, including John's children, Brian, Michael, Terry, Kathryn, Patricia, Judith, Maureen and Paul and their families. May he rest in peace. Taxation 21 13:43 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong They are at it again. The Liberals and Nationals are out there, scaring Australians and making stuff up rather than explaining why they're now supporting Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts. What they don't want to talk about is that this government is giving every Australian a tax cut—everyone, not just some. Given that they're not talking about it, I thought I would use this time here today to do so. In my electorate of Bennelong alone 92,000 taxpayers will receive a tax cut, and 81 per cent of taxpayers in Bennelong will see a larger tax cut than from the Morrison plan. We've done this because our communities have asked us to. Locals wanted tax relief to be better. Locals needed more cost-of-living relief, and locals want a government that isn't afraid to make the tough decisions. There was Annette, who wrote to me to tell me that 'revising the tax cuts in light of changed conditions is brave and necessary'. Then James reached out to tell me, 'As an average-income family with a child, I really appreciate what the Labor government is doing right now with tax.' So tomorrow I'll go back to these people to tell them that they have a local member who is part of a government that's ready to listen to them, because I proudly represent a community that wants a government that will make the hard decisions for the right reasons at the right times. With Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts, we've done just that. Albanese Government 22 13:45 Mr HOWARTH 247742 Petrie Remember when Prime Minister Albanese said, 'Life will be better under Labor'? Well, we've seen this week that Australians can't trust a word out of this Prime Minister's mouth. Despite his pledge, 'My word is my bond,' we all know now that this out-of-touch Labor government can't be trusted and Australians are no fools. The life they were promised is a fairy tale compared to the reality they are living every day, with groceries up by nine per cent, housing costs up by 12 per cent, electricity up by 20 per cent, insurance costs up by 22 per cent and gas up by 27 per cent. Families who were once trying to get ahead are now just trying to keep their heads above water. Now it is absolutely tragic to hear how children in my own electorate are paying the price, as local state schools contact me for help, telling me that they have to consider whether their students can participate in school sport this year, in 2024, as the cost of bus hire has gone up some 25 per cent. This is the reality that the Prime Minister and his government are clueless about. How did we get here, where students at public schools can't even get on a bus to go and play netball, basketball, rugby league or any sport, for that matter? I will tell you how we got here. We got here when this Prime Minister and Labor government lied their way to the Lodge and decided to put Australian families first. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Petrie, you will withdraw that comment. Mr HOWARTH 247742 Which comment? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 You know what unparliamentary term you used. Mr HOWARTH 247742 No. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Are you defying my order? Mr HOWARTH 247742 Which comment? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I'm not going to repeat your offence. Please stop wasting everybody's time. You know full well what term you used. That is unparliamentary behaviour. I ask you to withdraw it. Mr HOWARTH 247742 What was it, though? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 What do you think it was? Mr HOWARTH 247742 The way I worded it was okay I thought. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 No, it was not. Please withdraw it. Mr HOWARTH 247742 So you don't want me to repeat it—just say that I withdraw? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I do not wish for you to repeat it. Mr HOWARTH 247742 I withdraw. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Thank you very much. You just wasted a lot of time for the House. Mr HOWARTH 247742 You could have repeated it. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Would you like to continue the conversation and backchat me? Mr HOWARTH 247742 No. I'm quite happy. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I'd like to lift the level of debate in this and give the call to the member for Robertson. Priceline Pharmacy Kincumber 22 13:47 Dr REID 300126 Robertson I know that Australia's favourite pharmacist and member for Dobell, Emma McBride, will join me in congratulating Priceline Pharmacy Kincumber on being named one of the six finalists in the 2024 Guild Pharmacy of the Year Awards. The Australia-wide awards aim to find the country's foremost community pharmacy, which is recognised and celebrated for its achievements, its innovation and its commitment to patients and communities. The nation's winning pharmacy will be announced at the 2024 Australian Pharmacy Professional Conference on the Gold Coast in March. Community pharmacies play an integral role in the health care of all Australians. They dispense prescriptions, provide advice on medication and usage to doctors and patients, and educate people on health promotion, disease prevention and the correct use of medications. There are around 5,700 pharmacist-owned community pharmacies in Australia, employing 60,000 people, with each community pharmacy committed to developing strong relationships with patients. The stronger the patient-pharmacist relationship is, the better the health outcomes are. I have on many occasions visited Priceline Pharmacy Kincumber and have seen the incredible effort its staff display in ensuring patients receive the highest possible health care. To all the staff at Priceline Pharmacy Kincumber, congratulations on this recognition and good luck in March. To the owner and pharmacist, Trent Playford, thank you for always putting patient health care first and being a strong supporter of health care on the Central Coast. Economy 23 13:48 Mr JOYCE e5d New England Our grandparents lived in a very fractious time, a very dangerous time. We, on the balance of things, have lived in a pretty good time. But, unfortunately, it's changing again. The world is changing, and our children are going to live in a vastly more dangerous world than we did. With the rise of a totalitarian, militaristic China, a rogue state in North Korea, an architect of third-party terrorism in Iran and Russia actually invading another nation, the world is changing. So our priority for this nation is to make it as strong as possible as quickly as possible and as powerful as possible as quickly as possible. Do multinational companies swindling the taxpayer with government subsidisation of construction of intermittent wind factories, intermittent solar factories and a cobweb of transmission lines give us any prospect of competing against baseload coal-fired, nuclear-fired China? Do we have the capacity in the future to defend our families and defend this nation as we have done in the past? Our job in making this nation as powerful as possible as quickly as possible relies so much on having affordable and reliable power as the food stock of virtually every other sector of the economy. If we do not have a broad base strong economy we do not give ourselves the best chance. Taxation 23 13:50 Mr RAE 300122 Hawke We know that Australians are doing it tough with the cost of living. While inflation is moderating, household budgets are still under pressure. That's why this week the Albanese Labor government introduced Labor's tax cuts to the parliament. From 1 July this year every single Australian taxpayer will receive a tax cut. It's about putting more money back in pockets and supporting the people who need it most. Thanks to Labor's tax cuts, the average taxpayer in Hawke will receive a tax cut of $1,428 each. While every taxpayer will receive a tax cut, 89 per cent of taxpayers in Hawk will be better off than under Scott Morrison's old plan. A police officer in Bacchus Marsh on 110 grand will get a tax cut of $2,429—that's $804 more than under Morrison's plan. A teacher in Melton on $75,000 will get a tax cut of $1,554—again, that's $804 more than under Morrison's plan. A household in Sunbury with a truckie on 80 grand and a part-time nurse on 50 grand will get a total household tax cut of $2,608—over $1,600 more than under Scott Morrison's old plan. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party was very quick to jump up and say— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The member for Hawke is going to need to use correct titles for members that sit in this House. Mr RAE 300122 Acknowledged. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party was quick to say, 'We will fight this legislation in the parliament, we don't even know what it'll look like.' They're only interested in playing politics with these tax cuts, not helping people with the cost of living. Capricornia Electorate: Infrastructure 23 13:51 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia Last week marked a significant milestone in the journey of the Rockhampton Ring Road, a project that has weathered challenges, with the full funding now being committed. More than 15 months have passed since the Prime Minister first used the budgetary axe, casting a shadow over this crucial infrastructure initiative. However, I stood alongside my fellow colleagues in the Rockhampton community who were determined to prevent the abandonment of a project that held the key to transforming the Rockhampton region. The relentless efforts of the community shamed Labor into reluctantly reinstating funding for the Rockhampton Ring Road. This vital piece of infrastructure is set to alleviate traffic congestion within the city, providing a smoother and safer environment for residents. Additionally, by redirecting trucks away from schools along the Bruce Highway, we are prioritising the safety of our children. Let's rewind to 2018 when the former coalition government kickstarted the Rockhampton Ring Road with an $800 million investment. An extra $52 million was also delivered in 2019 to fund the planning and preservation activities for the project. The Rockhampton Ring Road was no longer just a concept on paper; it was a vision turning into reality. Despite not receiving an invitation from the Prime Minister's office to partake in the sod-turn last week, my enthusiasm remains undiminished. Witnessing the official commencement of this long-fought-for project fills me with pride and satisfaction as I deliver more infrastructure for Capricornia. Hunter Electorate: Wambo Coal Singleton Hall of Fame 24 13:53 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter I rise today to congratulate the six new additions that have been inducted into the Wambo Coal Singleton Hall of Fame. Val Smith has for more than half a century donated her time and skills towards local community organisations and charities. We recognise her for her amazing community service. There are too many to list today, but some groups that Val has been part of include: the Northern Agricultural Association Committee and the Singleton RSL Women's Auxiliary. Anita White has also been recognised for her community service. Anita is the CEO of Whitmore Enterprises and is extremely dedicated to ensuring people with a disability are active members of the workforce. Gary Holland is dedicated to helping young people. Gary is the man behind the not-for-profit Dolly's Charity Shop. Gary is also a volunteer with a range of community initiatives. The School of Infantry was inducted for their public service. For half a century, generations of soldiers have been connected to Singleton through the completion of their training in the School of Infantry. The Singleton Service Widows Group, who are devoted to enhancing the lives of families of veterans who have served, were also inducted. The final inductee was Singleton Neighbourhood Centre, which provides a variety of community welfare services to the people of Singleton. Congratulations to all of you. Thank you for all you do in our community, and keep up the great work. Without people who donate their time, as you people have done, we wouldn't have community organisations and we wouldn't have the places we have in the Hunter. We thank you so much. Australian Passport Office 24 13:55 Mr LEESER 109556 Berowra All members have received emails like these from Danielle, Darko and Stephanie, which I received in my office: 'I'm writing in desperation. My son's passport, which I lodged four months ago, hasn't arrived.' 'I'm a single mum and I feel like my trip is hanging in the balance.' 'I've been training six to seven days a week and I think I'm going to miss my sporting competition.' Yesterday's report by the Australian National Audit Office confirms what every member knows—that is, that the performance of the Passport Office has been steadily getting worse. The assistant minister has been asleep at the wheel and, when awoken by the audit report, he blamed his predecessors. But the audit report tells the story: last financial year one in four passports took more than six weeks to process; productivity in the office has fallen by over half; the cost of producing a passport has risen by 23 per cent over the past five years; the government has kept over $15 million in urgent processing fees, even when the passports weren't processed on time; and there is no complaints system. The minister needs to grab the Passport Office by the scruff of its neck and ensure that the agency is putting Australians first. All this is happening. Meanwhile, the government is increasing the price of passports by 15 per cent on 1 July. Labor has already hiked up 10-year passports by $38, and they're going up again on 1 July, by $52. The minister needs to awaken from his slumber, stop blaming others, fix the Passport Office and scrap the passport increase. Papua New Guinea 24 13:56 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck I'm reflecting on the address today by the Hon. James Marape. He noted that Australians often don't understand just how much history we have in common. I have to agree, if only because my husband, Nenad Djurdjevic, and his brother Dan, having grown up in Rabaul and Kavieng in the 1970s, regaled me with memories of playing in the ruins of World War II battlements and tunnels. But I came to learn about the battle of Rabaul and how it informs our contemporary strategic thinking. In January 1942, the strategic port of Rabaul—then an Australian territory—was invaded. It was our first blood in the Pacific War. Across that month, Rabaul was attacked by hundreds of aircraft and an invasion force of more than 5,000. The taking of Rabaul was swift, efficient and deadly. The desperate actions by the Australian troops, outnumbered, as Corporal Norm Furness recounted, at a ratio of about 10 to one, were not successful, and they were ordered to retreat and fight a guerrilla war for which they were completely ill-prepared and unequipped. The total enemy force soon numbered 15,000, and, at its peak in 1943, over 110,000. More than 1,000 Australian soldiers and civilians were brutally massacred, murdered or died tragically as prisoners of war, as did an unknown number of New Guineans. As Prime Minister Marape said today, there are security lessons in history for PNG and Australia. How fortunate we are for the friendship and the shared values of our nearest neighbour, Papua New Guinea, a friendship forged through adversity. Wine Industry 25 13:58 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I rise to highlight concerns for wine growers across the Riverina and Murray Valley in my electorate of Farrar, the largest wine-producing region in New South Wales. The ongoing wine tariff imposed from China has doubled a problem for the industry that our government must address. The four-year Chinese freeze and other supply chain hold-ups are causing a massive oversupply of mainly red wine grapes, leaving a monumental supply-and-demand imbalance. Bulk prices sit as low as 25c a litre, falling well below the cost of production. Rising inflation has also caused manufacturing input costs to rise. Unrest in the Middle East is affecting shipping to other markets. Also, unhelpfully, growers are now unsure of the price of water, with the federal government re-entering the market with buy-backs but not disclosing the price. We hope, of course, the 200 per cent tariffs undertaken by Beijing will be lifted, regardless of other factors, but a new mandatory code of conduct is needed through the entire supply chain. That's what my growers believe; that's what they deserve. Some farmers will also need financial assistance to transition. They also need backing to remove and distil old and degraded wine caught up in the supply logjam. To date this government's answer has been handballing impacted wine growers off to broad rural assistance programs. More needs to be done. I am committed to seeing that occur. I stand by my wine growers across the Riverina and the Murray. 13:59 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton ():  I rise to celebrate the lunar new year, welcome in the year of the dragon and bid farewell to the year of the rabbit. It's always good to welcome in a new year that will be good for the dragon, and I'm looking forward to going back to my electorate. People born in the year of the dragon are destined for greatness and good fortune. Xinnian kuaile xiexie—I hope we have a good year of the dragon. (Time expired) The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. CONDOLENCES 25 CONDOLENCES Lightfoot, Mr Philip Ross 25 14:00 The SPEAKER 53517 I inform the House of the death on 11 January 2024 of Philip Ross Lightfoot, a former senator. Ross Lightfoot represented the state of Western Australia from 1997 to 2008. As a mark of respect to the memory of Ross Lightfoot, I invite all present to rise in their places. Honourable members having stood in their places— The SPEAKER 53517 I thank the House. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 25 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Youth Crime 25 14:01 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia My question is to the Attorney-General. My home state of Queensland has faced a devastating wave of youth crime. Given the very strong concern in my home state and around Australia about youth crime, will the Attorney-General now reverse the Albanese government's commitment to raise the age of criminal responsibility at a Commonwealth level and encourage state governments to do the same? 14:01 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs I thank the honourable member for her question. Youth crime is of course a matter that every single person in this chamber should be rightly concerned about. Certainly our government is very concerned about youth crime, very concerned about policing practice and very concerned about the laws which deal with youth crime and underlie prosecution for youth crime in our country, just as we're concerned with the detention of our young people in youth detention centres. I fear that the member has not understood the discussion. I fear that the member has not understood the matter which she raised in her question about raising the age of criminal responsibility. The question of raising the age of criminal responsibility has been a matter of serious discussion—not a matter of serious discussion for many of those opposite but a matter of serious discussion in the criminal justice system. All Attorneys-General are concerned with this, and that's why the matter of raising the age of criminal responsibility was placed on the agenda of the Standing Council of Attorneys-General when I recreated the Standing Council of Attorneys-General, which had been abolished by the former government, upon us coming to government in May last year. We will continue to discuss the question of raising the age of criminal responsibility. I note that some state and territory governments have already legislated to raise the age of criminal responsibility. Other state or territory governments have announced their intention to raise the age of criminal responsibility. Overwhelmingly this is a matter that concerns state and territory governments because overwhelmingly it is not— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Herbert will cease interjecting. Mr DREYFUS HWG I know that those opposite have got no actual interest in this subject. I include in this movement of the age of criminal responsibility the movement of the Liberal government in Tasmania, where they have changed— The SPEAKER 53517 The Attorney-General will pause. I'll hear from the Leader of the Opposition. Mr Dutton 00AKI On relevance, the Attorney-General is advocating an increase in the age of criminal responsibility, and he should— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. The Leader of the Opposition is entitled to raise a point of order, but the minister is directly referring to the age of criminal responsibility. I'll listen carefully to make sure that he continues to be relevant. He has the call for 28 seconds. Mr DREYFUS HWG There was a false premise in the question I was asked, and there's another false premise that's been raised by the Leader of the Opposition in his non-point of order. The matter will continue to be discussed in the Standing Council of Attorneys-General. Cost of Living 26 14:05 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My question is to the Prime Minister. What feedback has the government received about Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts? What attempts have there been to prevent cost-of-living relief for middle Australia? 14:05 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Blair for his question and for his strong advocacy for the people of Ipswich. Our plan is aimed squarely at middle Australia, helping low- and middle-income earners who are under financial pressure. Those opposite, of course, would never have thought of doing this, and they're already working on how to undo it. The reason it didn't cross their mind to cut taxes for low- and middle-income earners is because they simply don't think about them. Their gut reaction was to oppose it. Their first instinct was to roll it back. At the first chance they get, they will walk away from middle Australia. Now, they can change how they vote, but they'll never change who they are, and we saw it there last night, with that rather extraordinary performance from the Leader of the Opposition on ABC's 7.30 program—an extraordinary, angry performance. I think a shorter assessment was given by Malcolm Turnbull during the Nemesis program. You know something's remarkable when Malcolm Turnbull can describe something in one word and one syllable. You know that's right. He got this bloke right. We saw it last night—all the anger. No wonder they keep him away from serious interviews, the National Press Club or any proper forums. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Moreton is warned. The member for Page on point of order. Mr Hogan 218019 On relevance, it was a dorothy dixer to the Prime Minister, but it wasn't a question to lash out at the opposition leader. The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister was asked about feedback regarding the cost-of-living tax cuts. So I'll just listen to him. Mr ALBANESE R36 It was very modest compared to what we've said about each other—very modest. The fact is that, last night, the feedback from the Leader of the Opposition was that he agreed that our tax cuts would help low- and middle-income earners. When asked why he then didn't just keep the high-end stuff as well, he said, 'Well, you can't do both.' It was an assessment that gave a complete tick to the actions that this government has taken, which is maybe why they're voting for it but arguing against it at the same time. But Australians out there are saying positive things. Australians out there are responding because they know that this government had the courage to take the right decision at the right time for the right reasons to make a difference for them. Middle East 26 14:09 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield My question is to the Prime Minister. Yesterday, the member for Melbourne moved a shameful motion that attacked Israel and gave Hamas terrorists a free pass. Will the government today join the opposition in standing with Australia's Jewish community and condemn the Greens for their blatantly antisemitic behaviour, or is the Prime Minister too dependent on Greens preferences and Greens support in the Senate to have the courage to do so? The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The member for Spence will cease interjecting. Order. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The House is going to come to order. The manager was heard in silence. The Prime Minister has the call. 14:10 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler It's a serious question, in the context of the worst social disharmony that I have seen, not just in my time in politics but in my time that I've been alive, in this country. It shouldn't be weaponised. I condemn, totally, any form of antisemitism—including the comments by my local member, the member for Newtown, whose comments about 'tentacles', with regard to the Jewish community, I find offensive. I find it had its origins in antisemitism. And I condemn it unequivocally—just as I condemn forms of, that I have seen, Islamophobic comments and behaviour as well. Now, no-one moved a motion in this parliament yesterday. There was an attempt to suspend standing orders yesterday—that's what there was. And, when there's an attempt to suspend standing orders, as someone who occupies the position of Manager of Opposition Business should know, that is the matter that is before the chair—nothing else; nothing else. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The Leader of the Opposition— The SPEAKER 53517 Look, the Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. The Prime Minister is being directly— Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Order, members on my right! Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order on my right and left. The Prime Minister is being directly relevant and talking about the motion, that he was asked about, yesterday. I'm going to call for silence. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs is warned. The Prime Minister, in continuation. Mr ALBANESE R36 That was the matter that I understand was moved before this chamber: a suspension of standing orders, from a member of a minor political party. I've got to say that, when a suspension of standing orders is moved by the Greens political party, what I don't do is elevate it. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE R36 What I don't do also is to come into the chamber when there are micky votes that aren't counted. I don't do it, because, for obvious reasons, I have other things to do—other priorities. So, Mr Speaker, if the test— The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The Prime Minister's time has concluded. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 There's far too much noise in the chamber. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Members on my right, including the frontbench, will cease interjecting, so I can hear from—order! I'd like to hear from the member— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Wannon? Mr Tehan 210911 The Minister for the Environment and Water made an unparliamentary remark. You did. And it would help the House— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Resume your seat. I call the Prime Minister on the point of order. Mr ALBANESE R36 The context of the interjections that are going across this chamber—I would have thought the idea that there's anyone on that side—I don't accuse them, and they shouldn't accuse anyone in my party of being anything other than totally opposed to racism in all its forms, including, of course, the rise of antisemitism. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll deal with this matter. If everyone could cease interjecting across the chamber, we won't be having this problem. I had immediately called for order in the chamber. If ministers are interjecting and opposition members are interjecting, I can't hear them. From this moment on, for the remainder of question time, cease interjecting. We won't have that problem. The House is in order. Ms Plibersek 83M I'm happy to withdraw. I'd love to see the return to order of the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 I thank the minister for assisting the House. Order! We shall move on. Taxation 28 14:16 Ms VAMVAKINOU 00AMT Calwell My question is to the Treasurer. How will the Albanese Labor government's cost-of-living tax cuts deliver benefits for workers, communities and the economy, and what hurdles were overcome? 14:16 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thank you to the wonderful member for Calwell for the way that she represents the 72,000 taxpayers who will get a tax cut in her community, 90 per cent of whom will get a bigger tax cut because of our changes. Our cost-of-living tax cuts are good for middle Australia, good for workers, families and communities and good for the economy. Every taxpayer right up and down the income scale gets a tax cut, and 84 per cent of taxpayers get a bigger tax cut. Ninety-eight per cent of teachers get a bigger tax cut, 97 per cent of truckies, 96 per cent of cleaners, 91 per cent of police officers, 91 per cent of mechanics and 90 per cent of taxpaying women. Regional workers and workers under 35 get a bigger tax cut because of our changes. These are the workers that those opposite have tried to dud and diminish, and they're still at it. They say they support our tax cuts, but their heart is not in it. We know this because the Deputy Leader said that, of course and absolutely, they'd try and roll them back. We know this because the shadow Treasurer described bigger tax cuts as Marxism. If they really support these tax cuts, why are they still bagging them? If they think we're wrong about this, why don't they vote against them in the parliament? After five years and everything that's happened in between, all they can come up with is the old stage 3 cuts that the member for Cook announced all those years ago. That's not a policy; that's a defibrillator trying to revive the Morrison government. They've learned nothing from their decade of division and dysfunction and failure in the economy. That's why their position on tax is indefensible and unsustainable. That's why the Opposition Leader absolutely disintegrated on national TV last night. He doesn't understand that anger is not an alternative. He doesn't understand his nasty negativity is no substitute for economic credibility. Theirs is a recipe for higher inflation, lower wages and smaller tax cuts for the workers of middle Australia. After this week, a few things have been made absolutely clear under this Prime Minister and his government. Only Labor puts people before politics. Only Labor is the party of middle Australia. Only Labor is the party of aspiration. Only Labor is the party of working people, their families and their communities. Only Labor is the party of bigger tax cuts for more people to help with cost of living. That's why we are so proud of the tax cuts in the legislation before the House. Economy 28 14:19 Ms SPENDER 286042 Wentworth My question is to the Treasurer. Young people in Australia are going backwards. In the last decade or so, a family headed by somebody over 65 saw their wealth increase by 50 per cent, but the wealth of households headed by someone under 35 has barely moved. This can't have been the intention of government policy, and it's not the fault of older Australians, but it has created an intergenerational tragedy. Whilst I acknowledge the positive steps the government has taken to support young people, I don't think they're sufficient to close the wealth gap between younger and older Australians, now or into the future. Does the Treasurer share my concerns? 14:20 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thanks to the member for Wentworth for her question. I think it's fair to say there is always more work to make sure that we are delivering the kind of intergenerational fairness which is at the very core of the government's view of the world. I want to thank the member for Wentworth for her genuine and informed interest in an area of particular focus for the government and for her passion of mind, certainly, and I want to thank her for the engagement when it comes to these really important intergenerational issues. Our mission as a government is to try and modernise the economy and maximise our advantages so that we can position our people as the major beneficiaries of change, rather than as victims of change, in our economy and our society. That's really the motivation behind a whole raft of policies in the various portfolios represented along the front here. It's certainly the motivation behind the Intergenerational report and the focus on the five big intergenerational challenges and chances. It's certainly the focus of our human capital agenda, which we laid out collectively in our employment white paper not that long ago. It's behind our efforts to get the budget in much better nick so that future generations aren't carrying a disproportionate burden when it comes to repaying the trillion dollars in Liberal debt that we were left to deal with. It's the motivation behind our housing agenda to try and build more homes. It's the motivation behind the energy transformation, which I know the member shares a deep and abiding interest in. It's also the motivation behind some of the newer things that we are trying in our portfolios—and I'm working closely with the minister here—when it comes to trying to break the cycle of intergenerational disadvantage, particularly in communities like the one that sends me to this place to work on their behalf. The intergenerational issues are also a big motivating force behind our tax reform agenda. Be it the superannuation tax concessions changes that we're proposing, getting a fairer return via the PRRT for our resources, multinational tax reform, tax breaks for energy efficiency, tax breaks for EVs or tax breaks for more build-to-rent properties, there is an intergenerational element to this which I think is really important. To finish with where I think the honourable member's question comes from, it's a big motivation behind the tax changes that we proposed this week and seek to legislate in this place. I do understand that, even after these important changes, it will always require the ongoing interest and effort from governments like ours to deal with some of these intergenerational challenges. But I also want to point out that our tax changes are much better for young people than the old stage 3 tax cuts that they replaced were. That's for 90 per cent of people under 35— Mr Albanese R36 And 98 per cent. Dr CHALMERS 37998 and 98 per cent of the younger cohort, as the PM reminds me. It's better for bracket creep, better for workforce incentives and better for our economy. (Time expired) Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Bill 2023 29

Fair Work Legislation Amendment (Closing Loopholes No. 2) Bill 2023

14:23 Dr GARLAND 295588 Chisholm My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How will the passage of the Albanese Labor government's closing loopholes legislation provide job security and minimum standards for people who need it? How is the government making sure Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn? 14:23 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I thank the member for Chisholm for the question. There are just over 80,000 taxpayers in Chisholm. They've already been getting pay rises, and, thanks to the government's tax plan, they're going to be getting tax cuts as well. Today is a good day for casuals, a good day for gig workers, a good day for truck drivers and people in road transport, and a good day for those workers who want to be able to know that, when they're on their weekend and not being paid, they can enjoy their weekend. I'm pleased to report to the House—and this will make many members happy and make those opposite cranky, but it's probably a bit late to make them cranky; that happened sometime earlier, like on waking up or something like that—that a majority of senators have declared support to pass the closing loopholes bill No. 2 today. I want to thank the Australian Greens for the negotiations that happened there. I want to thank Senator Lidia Thorpe, who's been strong in backing working people. I want to thank Senator David Pocock for the work that he's done in working through amendments. And while, Senator Lambie, we didn't end up reaching agreement on the bill as a whole, there will be some amendments—not all of Senator Lambie's amendments—that were negotiated and agreed amongst all of those who were part of the negotiations that we'll be supporting in good faith. It makes a palpable difference for workers who have had no minimum standards to now have some. When you say, 'What's the minimum wage for a gig worker?' There is none—until this bill goes through. It will go through, and gig workers in Australia will know that Australia is truly a country where you don't have to rely on tips to make ends meet, where you don't have all your rights fall off a cliff because you don't make a technical definition of employment. In road transport, we've heard too many stories, including in parliamentary inquiries, of drivers under intense pressure. One driver, Robert Ireland, reported 13 days straight on the road, where he would have to ply himself with 19 stubbies just to dissipate the effects of the methamphetamines that he was taking to meet the demands of work. Minimum standards for the road transport industry will now be possible. Ask the National Road Freighters Association, ask NatRoad, ask the Australian Trucking Association, ask all the organisations that those opposite previously lined up with that have now been supporting this reform. For casuals, your rent isn't casual; your mortgage isn't casual; your bills aren't casual. And, if your hours are completely reliable, casuals will now have a pathway to permanent work. Secure jobs and better pay might anger those opposite, but it makes a palpable difference to workers. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Riverina will cease interjecting. Trust me: I can hear him. I give the call to the member for Hume. Negative Gearing 30 14:27 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's and the Treasurer's repeated refusals to rule out changes to negative gearing. Will the Prime Minister give a commitment to the Australian people that Labor's changes will include grandfathering of pre-existing negative gearing arrangements? The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Assistant Treasurer will cease interjecting. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for O'Connor will cease interjecting. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left and my right: I've been crystal clear during the week. The time for interjecting is not before I call a minister or prime minister. The Prime Minister has the call. 14:27 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler We've entered the twilight zone officially now. What we have before us is real legislation about tax changes before the parliament. That's what we have before us. What we have now is the shadow Treasurer asking for details about things that are only happening in his head. They're only happening in his own conversations with himself. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right, the member for Hume wishes to make a point of order. Mr Taylor 231027 On relevance, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER 53517 The Prime Minister was asked a question about tax changes and negative gearing. I'm going to ask him to return to the question. He's had a preamble for only 45 seconds. Mr Taylor 231027 Mr Speaker, I was going to make my point on relevance. The SPEAKER 53517 Yes. I'm saying that the Prime Minister needs to—the member for Hume can have round 2. Go for it. Mr Taylor 231027 The Prime Minister has lied to the Australian people over 100 times. Why would anyone believe him on this? The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Hume, I think, knows what will happen next. He may leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Hume then left the chamber. The SPEAKER 53517 I remind all members about parliamentary language. We have had one point of order. There'll be no more points of order during this answer. The Prime Minister has the call. Mr ALBANESE R36 He might have been on the early flight on a Thursday, but I don't think that was the motive. I think the motive is he is so embarrassed by his own position on taxation that he can't even bear to sit in the chamber. He's so embarrassed that as shadow Treasurer—we have a tax cut plan before this parliament that is worth $107 billion over the forward estimates, and the shadow Treasurer can't ask a question about it. He can't raise anything about it. He was asked— Mr Sukkar 242515 On a point of order— Mr ALBANESE R36 He's already made a ruling. The SPEAKER 53517 You've already had one point on relevance. It had better be a real of point of order, or you'll go the same way. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. I'll hear from the member for Deakin. Mr Sukkar 242515 I'm entitled to come to the dispatch box. The SPEAKER 53517 You are, and to take the point of order. You may proceed. Mr Sukkar 242515 The Prime Minister is defying your order. The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. I'm going to deal with this. I said it was in 42 seconds and the Prime Minister was entitled to a preamble. It was far too early to call a point on relevance, when the Prime Minister hasn't even got to his answer. I give the call to the Prime Minister. Mr ALBANESE R36 I reckon they probably saw the Leader of the Opposition on 7.30 last night. They're all trying to bail out. The shadow Treasurer asked me a question about tax, and he was asked a question about tax on the Sunrise program. It sums up exactly what their position is. So do you want more support for people in the lower end? The shadow Treasurer: 'No.' No, they don't. They oppose what we're doing. They won't ask any questions about what's before the parliament. All they're asking about is what's going on inside their own little heads and inside their own discussions, inside the twilight zone in which they exist. Taxation 31 14:32 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. How is the Albanese Labor government responding to the economic times and delivering better tax cuts to support those living in my community and across all of regional Australia? 14:32 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I thank very much the member for Bendigo for her question. The member, of course, is correct: the Albanese Labor government's tax cuts are good news for Australian taxpayers living in the regions, and that of course includes the 66,000 taxpayers living in the member's electorate of Bendigo, who will receive an average tax cut of over $1,424 from 1 July. It's a similar story all across regional Australia: ninety per cent of regional taxpayers are getting a bigger tax cut under Labor's plans. Labor's tax cuts are good for taxpayers all across the country, but they are particularly important for those of us who live in the regions. Regional Australians know that our tax cut is a better plan for regional taxpayers. The only people who don't actually get that are sitting opposite me here. We recognise that a lot of people are doing it tough and taxpayers need relief. That relief is exactly what our bigger tax cuts for middle Australia will help to deliver. We do know that, when asked if the opposition would roll back Labor's tax cuts, we had the Deputy Leader of the Opposition saying, 'Well, this is our position. This is absolutely our position.' This is funny little thing called TV— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Minister needs to be heard in silence. There is far too much noise from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. I'm going to reset and make sure the minister can be heard. Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR The Deputy Leader of the Opposition said, 'This is absolutely our position.' There's this funny thing called 'TV' that captures that, so there you go! That is what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition believes, that our tax cuts should be rolled back for middle Australia—particularly for those in the regions, who would actually be left behind. She has nailed the opposition's colours to the mast and now regional Australians know that, deep down, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition—a so-called representative of regional Australia—doesn't think our regions deserve a better tax cut. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition can stand up for whatever she wants, but on this side we're going to stand up for taxpayers in regional Australia. We're standing with the 76,000 taxpayers in Farrer who are getting an 87 per cent bigger tax cut under Labor. We're standing up for the nurse in Albury who is earning $73,000 and who will receive a tax cut of $1,504—$804 more than they would have received under the plan of those opposite. We're standing up for the Woolies worker in Tamworth who is earning $40,000 and who will receive a tax cut of $654, but zero under the plan of those opposite. These are the nurses, teachers, retail workers, casual workers, labourers, truckies, council workers and agricultural workers—the backbone of regional Australia—who those opposite like to pretend they care about. When the rubber really hits the road, they don't care about them at all! Motor Vehicles 31 14:36 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson My question is to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. Based on the government's secret modelling, can the minister guarantee that Labor's new tax on utes and cars will not increase the purchasing of a new SUV, people mover or ute in Australia? Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting. The member for Moreton will leave the chamber under 94(a). He was on a warning and it is not the time to interject before a minister speaks. The question was heard in silence, and so shall the minister. The member for Moreton then left the chamber. 14:37 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I thank the member for Dawson very much for the question. I'd like to start my answer with a quote: … when fuel efficiency standards were introduced in the US, the most popular models before introduction stayed the most popular models after introduction … what we'd call utes … There wasn't a material change in price and we don't expect that there would be a material change in price here. Now, who said that? Who said that? You'd think it would be me because in terms of the new vehicle efficiency standard impact analysis we have put out, that is what's in there. It could have been Minister Bowen as well. But who was that? It was, in fact, the member for Bradfield, when he released the draft regulatory impact statement for the fuel efficiency standards that those opposite were going to introduce back in 2018! Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right will cease interjecting. Taxation 32 14:38 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons My question is to the Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories. How will Labor's new tax cuts provide cost-of-living relief to local government workers across Australia? 14:38 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I thank the member for his question—he's a hardworking member who knows local councils in his electorate are delivering services to every local community. Labor's new tax cuts will benefit every Australian, from local government workers in the centre of our biggest cities to those who work in the most remote parts of the country. The 546 councils across Australia employ around 190,000 people across 400 different occupations— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Barker is warned! Ms McBAIN 281988 Local governments support our communities all around the nation. I'm proud to be part of a government that puts everyday hardworking Australians at the forefront of decision-making. A council officer in the member's state of Tasmania who earns $65,000 a year will now receive a tax cut of $1,304. Labor's new tax cuts will see a water and sewer apprentice working in western New South Wales receive an additional $1,179 in their pocket come 1 July. In Western Australia, an urban environmental health coordinator on $125,000 will see a tax cut of $3,029. A graduate planning officer in regional Victoria, a much-needed role in all of our councils, on $75,000 year will see a tax cut of $1,554. As a former mayor, I know how hard our local government workers are working. They deliver important services to every community across the country. Without our local council workers, we wouldn't see our rubbish collected, we wouldn't see our roads driveable, and our parks and recreational spaces might not be fit for purpose. I have seen first-hand during natural disasters that it is often council workers manning roadblocks. They are often the ones keeping our sewage treatment plants working and the water pumping to communities in essential times. I want to acknowledge all of their hard work and commitment during times of natural disaster. These workers often go not properly acknowledged in our communities. They deserve a tax cut. They deserve to keep more of what they earn in their pockets, and, under Labor's new tax plan, we are delivering for every local council worker across the nation and for every Australian taxpayer. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Petrie will cease interjecting or be warned. Minister For Defence 32 14:41 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Can the minister confirm reports in an article by Andrew Tillett in today's Australian Financial Review about the minister giving a verbal dressing-down of his secretary and the Chief of the Australian Defence Force. Why does the minister blame officials for his own failures of leadership? 14:41 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio I thank the member for his question. It is an important question. The Department of Defence and the Australian Defence Force are on a journey, and we are working very cooperatively with the senior leadership of the Department of Defence and the ADF in relation to that journey. But I make no excuses or apologies for demanding excellence and a culture of excellence in the Department of Defence and in the Australian Defence Force. There is a way to go before we have that culture of excellence in the Department of Defence and in the Australian Defence Force. But having said that, I have some sympathy for where Defence is at, because the issues around culture in Defence today are a result of the 10-year tenure from those opposite. Because when you have six—really seven—different defence ministers over the course of nine years, that is demoralising to Defence and it has been. When you lead the oldest surface fleet in our country since the Second World War, that is demoralising and it has been. When you make $45 billion worth of announcements and you do not put a cent behind them, that is demoralising and it has been. So there is a lot of mess to clean up, which this government is committed to doing. We are giving the Defence Force a strategic purpose. We are giving it direction. We are working closely with the Defence Force and cooperatively and well to improve the culture but there is a way to go because of the mess that was left by those opposite. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Herbert was continually interjecting during that answer on a warning and he will leave the chamber under 90 4A. Taxation 33 14:43 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie My question is to the Minister for Aged Care and Sport. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to boost pay in female-dominated industries, including aged care, and make sure workers keep more of their hard-earned wages? 14:43 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley I thank the member for Macquarie not only for her question but for the wonderful work that she does for her constituents, particularly for the 67,000 taxpayers in Macquarie who will now receive a tax cut from 1 July, and that includes many thousands of aged-care workers. The Albanese Labor government is proud to have delivered a 15 percent increase to the award wage minimum for aged-care workers in this country after a very long time in the wilderness from those opposite. Day in, day out, our aged-care workers deliver quality care for some of the most vulnerable people in our community and, for that, we thank you. But like so many Australians, hardworking aged-care workers are feeling the cost-of-living pressures and that is why we are ensuring that the people who care for some of our most vulnerable are being cared for as well and they are now getting a tax cut. They can earn more and they can keep more of what they earn. Under Labor's plan, on 1 July a registered nurse in aged care will receive a tax cut of $1,679, an enrolled nurse will receive a tax cut of $1,214, a cook in aged care will get a tax cut of $1,166, and a home-care worker will get a tax cut of $1,166 as well. Every single one of our valued aged-care workers will be better off because of Labor's tax cuts—better off because this is a government that cares about the people who provide care for us. They'll be better off because we have already funded a 15 per cent award wage rise for aged-care workers, a promise we made to the community, a promise that has helped people like Elle, who has three children and who works as a carer for home-care package recipient Rachel, whom I met while doorknocking in Chermside. Elle told Rachel that her pay rise meant she could buy new school shoes for each of her three children. Now we get to tell workers like Elle that not only does she have a pay rise but she is getting a tax cut too—a tax cut that will help her pay the bills, help her put good food on the table and help her care for her kids. Now we can tell every woman who's a taxpayer that the Albanese Labor government is delivering a tax cut for her. Under Labor's plan, aged-care workers, childcare workers and disability carers are among the most likely to benefit, with more than 95 per cent of female taxpayers to receive a bigger tax cut now. That is what valuing workers looks like. That is what caring for the people who care for us and who are under pressure looks like. That is what doing the right thing looks like. Australian taxpayers do not want the confusion being offered by those opposite on cost of living. They want stronger, fairer wages and they will continue to receive them under us. Taxation 33 14:46 Mr CHANDLER-MATHER 300121 Griffith My question is to the Prime Minister. This year, property investors like you will receive billions in tax handouts from this Labor government, including from negative gearing, driving up property prices. Prime Minister, you talk about supply. New housing construction has reached a 10-year low under your government. You talk about help to buy but will only help 0.2 per cent of the five million renters. Will your government phase out tax concessions for property investors, like negative gearing, so everybody can afford a good home? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! There was far too much noise during that question. The Minister for Early Childhood Education, the Leader of the Nationals: I couldn't hear what the member was saying. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! This works for everyone. The member will ask his question again so I can hear it. Mr CHANDLER-MATHER 300121 My question is to the Prime Minister. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Just resume your seat. Order! If everyone can just stop interjecting for the remainder of question time, things will be a lot smoother. I give the call to the Prime Minister. 14:47 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler Thanks, Mr Speaker. The member, of course, made a suggestion about you, Mr Speaker, in the language in that question, but we'll ignore that. There are a range of measures that the government has put in place. We want tax cuts for people on low and middle incomes. That's one thing that you can do to help people. The second thing that you can do is increase rent assistance. We had the largest rental assistance increase in 30 years. Then there are other things that we can do as well in terms of supply. The foreign investment fees for housing measures that we put in place in MYEFO in December are just the latest example of the measures that we've put in place. In addition to that, we have our Housing Accord. That included a new homes bonus of some $3 billion to incentivise new planning. It's planning that in some places is controversial, and I hope that the Greens political party talk to their local councillors about supporting—just once; anywhere will do—affordable housing in any community, including mine, because I'm yet to see the Greens political party support that, even award-winning medium-density housing in places like what was the old Marrickville Hospital site in my electorate. The other thing we're doing is the national housing infrastructure fund—that's very important. The social housing funding that we've put in place, including the social housing accelerator— Mr Chandler-Mather 300121 Mr Speaker, a point of order on relevance: we're almost two minutes into that answer and he hasn't once mentioned negative gearing. The SPEAKER 53517 I know that may be what the member would like the answer to be, but when you include things like the housing supply being at a 10-year low and about everyone benefiting, it's a fairly broad question. The Prime Minister is able to deal with all aspects of the question, not just one part of the question. So he is being directly relevant. If he wasn't talking about housing supply and the issues surrounding the question, he wouldn't be relevant. But at the moment he is, so he has the call. Mr ALBANESE R36 He's trying. We have the Housing Australia Future Fund, something that those opposite delayed month after month after month. They therefore delayed the building of housing for poor people and working-class people in our suburbs and in our regional towns. In addition to that we have our build-to-rent program. That's a tax incentive, a tax change, that we put in the last budget to encourage more investment in build-to-rent developments because we understand that it can't be just the public sector. We need to encourage that private sector investment. We understand across all of this that the key is supply, and that's why we will continue to negotiate with the states and territories. At the moment we're working through our National Housing and Homelessness Agreement, the major funding body over a period of time. We've extended it by $1.7 billion for the additional year. (Time expired) Taxation 34 14:51 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. How will the Albanese Labor government's tax cuts benefit the more than 75,000 Australians who work in the defence establishment, and what approaches have been rejected? 14:52 Mr MARLES HWQ Corio I thank the member for his question and acknowledge his service in the Australian Army and his ongoing commitment to advocating on the part of the men and women of Australia's Defence Force, particularly those who serve at RAAF Base Edinburgh in his electorate. Every member of the Australian Defence Force will receive a tax cut under Labor's tax plan. Every public servant in the Department of Defence and every person working in Australia's defence industry will receive a tax cut, meaning that those people who are serving our nation will take home more of what they earn. For example, a lieutenant logistics officer at HMAS Stirling in Rockingham will take home a tax cut of more than $2,500. A lance corporal at 3 Brigade in Townsville will take home a tax cut of $1,861. In the member's own electorate, an air defence guard at RAAF Base Edinburgh will take home a tax cut of $1,876. A defence civilian worker at the School of Infantry in Singleton will take home a tax cut of $1,463, which is more than twice the tax cut that person would have had under the policy of those opposite. Not by word, but by action, it is now completely clear that those opposite— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Member for Groom will cease interjecting. Mr MARLES HWQ support the call that has been made by this Prime Minister and this government in respect of tax, If it were different, they would be opposing the legislation in this parliament and they would be doing what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said they should do: roll this package back. The claim by those opposite that the Liberals are the party of lower taxes—that is not a tax policy; that is now just a pathetic whimper. The truth is that it's not even true. In modern times, the highest-taxing government in Australia has been the Howard Liberal government. The reality today is that the modern Liberal Party is the party of higher taxes, deep deficits and big debt. We understand that Australians are doing it tough with cost-of-living pressures. The only government which is delivering meaningful tax relief, which has delivered a budget surplus, which is ensuring our national security, is the Albanese Labor government. Motor Vehicles 35 14:55 Mr TED O'BRIEN 138932 Fairfax My question goes to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy: Can the minister confirm that the British version of the Mazda CX30 is $19,000 more expensive than similar models in Australia? Is this an indicator a likely impact of Labor's new car and ute tax? Will he admit that that vehicle's improved fuel efficiency falls well short of the 25 per cent that he has been claiming? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! There is far too much interjecting. The member for Cooper will cease interjecting. The member for Bruce is now warned. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy has the call. 14:56 Mr BOWEN DZS McMahon Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. I can't begin to tell you how much I appreciate a question from the honourable member for Fairfax. I was surprised that the first question got through the tactics committee on the fuel efficiency standards, but after the member for Ballarat's answer I'm very surprised the second question got through. Because what this government has done is put out a preferred position on a new vehicle efficiency standard to give Australians more choice of better cars. The other thing that surprises me is how anyone could be against that. Giving Australians more choice of better cars to run. It is the case that the Mazda CX30 available in the United Kingdom uses around 20 per cent less fuel than the most efficient Australian equivalent. The petrol Mazda CX5 sold overseas uses around 25 per cent less fuel than the most efficient version in Australia. The most efficient Mazda2—you asked about Mazdas, so I'm happy to give you quite a few—sold overseas uses around 25 per cent less fuel than the most efficient Australian equivalent. I think we know where this is going. I'm not the only person who thinks this is the case. The member for Ballarat, the minister for transport, and I released a very comprehensive analysis— The SPEAKER 53517 We don't need props. Mr BOWEN DZS I was going to table it, Mr Speaker—a comprehensive analysis on the weekend, which goes through very substantial analysis of the impact. The minister for transport and I checked the precedent for doing that, and we found that the precedent was established in 2016 by the member for Bradfield, who released an analysis, and that led the member for Bradfield to make certain observations of the impact. He found, for example, that there are cars sold in the United Kingdom by Mazda that are more efficient than those sold in Australia. That's what the member for Bradfield pointed out back in 2016. You chair the tactics committee. Do you let these questions through? I'm not quite sure how it happens, but the fact of the matter is that— The SPEAKER 53517 I ask the minister to address his comments through the chair. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order? Mr Dutton 00AKI On relevance, tellingly the minister makes no reference to the fact that the Mazda in the UK is $19,000 more expensive. He hasn't gone to that point. That is the crux of the question. Why is he applying a new tax to cars and utes in this country? The SPEAKER 53517 The minister has been mentioning Mazdas, but I just want to make sure that the Mazda he's referring to is related to the question. Mr BOWEN DZS I was making the point that there are several Mazdas and other models that are more efficient overseas than they are in Australia, and we believe that Australians have a right to access those better, cheaper to run cars. We believe that Australians deserve the right to lower emissions, cheaper to run cars. Those opposite apparently don't. That's a matter for them. They have a choice. They can stand against choice or they can stand for it. They can stand for better cars or they can stand against them. That is a choice that is available. The member for Bradfield, and before the member for Kooyong, tried it for five minutes in 2016 before they got vetoed by the hard right of the Liberal Party. This government will actually deliver better choice, with or without the help of those opposite. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Fairfax asked his question. He was continually interjecting. He's warned: no more interjections from the member for Fairfax, please. Education 36 15:00 Mr LIM 300130 Tangney My question is to the Minister for Education. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to support teachers and public education in Australia? Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 No! The member will resume his seat. Question time is not going to operate like that. Members are entitled to questions and should be shown respect when they're asking a question. They're to be heard in silence. It's not the time for making jokes or smart-alec remarks. It's not going to operate like that. It can't operate like that. 15:01 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank my great mate, the terrific member for Tangney, for his question. There is no more important job in this country than that of a schoolteacher. Everything they do helps our kids to aim higher, to work harder, to be braver and to believe in themselves. I'm sure all of us in this chamber and in the public gallery and press gallery can think of that one teacher who changed their life. We wouldn't be here as politicians or journos—or ABC TV stars like the member for Canning—if it weren't for our teachers. Who else would have taught him how to use that overhead projector? We're providing a tax cut to all Australian taxpayers, including 300,000 schoolteachers. A teacher fresh out of uni on 80 grand a year gets a tax cut of $1,679. A teacher a number of years into the job on $95,000 a year gets a tax cut of more than two grand. We need more teachers. That's what the extra uni places are about. That's what those $40,000 Commonwealth teaching scholarships are about. We need to improve teacher training. That's what those reforms to the university courses are about. They're to make sure that students at university come out with the skills they need to teach students how to read, write and do maths and to manage disruptive classrooms. We need to fix the funding of our public schools, and that's what the agreement I signed with the Western Australian government last week was about—making sure that we fully fund every public school in Western Australia by the start of 2026. That's just the start. We've also got to make sure that we give a tax cut to every teacher in this country. And, for that new teacher on 80 grand a year who gets a tax cut of $1,679, that's double what they would have gotten under the Liberal Party. It's only happening because of this Labor government. While we are working on that, what were they working on? They were working on their cameos for that true crime series on the ABC! What was it called? Nemesis? It's pretty wild! I thought David Attenborough should have been narrating it! The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will return to the question. Mr CLARE HWL That's the difference. They're focused on themselves. They're focused on the past. We're focused on making sure that every Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut, including our 300,000 Australian school teachers. Administrative Appeals Tribunal 36 15:04 Dr SCAMPS 299623 Mackellar My question is for the Attorney-General. In 2022, the minister announced the abolition of the AAT, stating that it had been fatally compromised by the stacking of Liberal cronies. But the new tribunal being proposed by the minister, while requiring merit based selection of new members, will not require any independence in that selection process. Merit and independence are not the same thing. The minister will still have the power to hand-pick mates for these plum jobs. Why is the Attorney-General going to the great effort of creating a new tribunal if it is to suffer the same fatal flaw that saw its predecessor abolished? 15:05 Mr DREYFUS HWG Isaacs I thank the member for Mackellar for her question. It is important to see the context that the member gave to her question. She is right to be concerned about the appointments process for the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and for the process for the new tribunal that we hope will replace it. This Liberal Party stacked the AAT with at least 85 former Liberal MPs, failed Liberal candidates, former Liberal staffers and other close Liberal associates without any merit based selection process. This Liberal Party cared so little about preserving the actual or perceived independence of the AAT that they even appointed active Liberal aligned lobbyists as members. The AAT's public standing was irreversibly damaged as a result of the actions of the previous government, and it's another mess that the Albanese government has to clean up. Since the 2022 federal election this government has made approximately 115 new appointments to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, including the new president. Each of these members was appointed pursuant to a merit based selection process. Each of those members applied for the job in response to a public advertisement and was assessed by an independent panel. Each of this government's new appointments to the AAT was endorsed by the panel as being suitable for appointment. There is no law that required our government to follow that or any other process in appointing AAT members, but that is what our government has done. The legislation that I introduced last year would abolish the AAT and replace it with a new administrative review body that is user focused, efficient, accessible, independent and fair. The legislation would require by law, as you mentioned in your question, Member for Mackellar, that members of the tribunal be appointed through a competitive, publicly advertised, merit based process supported by regulations that set out detailed procedural requirements and selection criteria. We are committed to ending the stack, and I would welcome engagement with the member for Mackellar and other members of this House who are interested about what those detailed regulations should look like and about other aspects of the legislation. Before concluding, it is deeply disappointing to see that the Greens party teamed up with the Liberal Party in the Senate today to disrupt and delay these generational reforms by delaying the committee inquiry process. We know why the Liberal Party wants to delay these reforms as long as possible—it's about protecting their stack. What I can't understand is why the Greens party are prepared to back the Liberal Party's disgraceful attempts to delay a vital reform that will have a real and lasting benefit for the lives of thousands of Australians. Taxation 37 15:08 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby My question is to the Minister for Defence Industry. How will the Albanese government's tax cuts support Australia's defence industry, and why is this so important? 15:08 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland I thank the fabulous member for Boothby, from the great defence state of South Australia, for that question. I note that the taxpayers of Boothby—all 84,000 of them—will get an average tax cut of $1,592. The truth is that the defence industry is a critical partner to the Australian Defence Force as we enter a great period of strategic uncertainty. That's why the Albanese Labor government is spending record amounts in the Australian defence industry, much greater than what was going on under the opposition leader. We've been very open that one of the challenges is to attract and retain skilled defence workers. That's why these tax cuts are so important. That's why these will make such an impact in helping our defence industry. A sheetmetal worker earning $70,000 a year will get a tax cut of $1,429, a technician on $90,000 a year will get a tax cut of $1,929, a welder on $110,000 will receive a tax cut of $2,429, and an engineer or an electrician on $130,000 a year will receive a tax cut of $3,379. These tax cuts are great for defence workers, they'll help with the cost of living, they'll reward workers for their hard work in a vital industry, they'll encourage more careers in the defence industry and they'll incentivise upskilling. I'm asked, 'Why are these tax cuts so important?' They're important because it's critical to deliver the key ADF platforms we need to defend this country, and it's critical to get the skilled workforce to do that. It's important to repair the damage done by the opposition leader when he was the defence minister. This is an opposition leader who allowed 28 major defence project to run 97 years late. The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will resume his seat. The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order. Mr Fletcher L6B On relevance: there's no reference to alternative policies. The minister made a threadbare attempt to justify this but he knows full well this is absolutely straining the bounds of relevance. He should be directed back to the terms of the question. The SPEAKER 53517 The question was about why this is so important. I don't that it's necessary for the minister to give a critique on the Leader of the Opposition, but he'll need to explain to the House why the changes are important rather than just giving a criticism of the opposition. He has the call. Mr CONROY 249127 As I was explaining, it's critical to build and retain a skilled defence industry workforce to repair projects and get them back on track, because of what occurred under the opposition leader. He had 28 projects running 97 years late and $6½ billion over budget. It's important to get skilled workers because we had the last government spend $114 million on a naval shipbuilding college that trained zero workers—not a single worker. It is important for these tax cuts to attract workers into the defence industry so that we do not repeat the opposition leader's mistakes of allowing supply vessels to not have safe drinking water for our brave sailors. This is the truth. Now the opposition leader is saying that the 100,000 workers who depend upon the defence industry don't deserve these tax cuts. The truth is, the opposition leader can't be trusted on tax cuts and he cannot be trusted on national security. (Time expired) Fuel 37 15:11 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson My question is to the Prime Minister. Can Australians afford a $19,000 increase in the cost of an average family car under his government's new car and ute tax? Will the Prime Minister give his word to the Australian people that a car and ute tax won't increase the price of cars here in Australia? The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right. The member for Lyons will cease interjecting and the Minister for the Environment and Water will cease interjecting. The Prime Minister has the call. 15:12 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler The whole premise of the Leader of the Opposition's question is completely wrong. He should talk to the Manager of Opposition Business about why it's wrong. The difference is, as the Manager of Opposition Business said: If Australia had fuel efficiency standards in line with comparable nations, estimates of the fuel saving per passenger vehicle could be above $500 per year, or nearly $28 billion in total by 2040. He said that in 2017. The member for Bradfield, I am sure, can confirm that when he came up with this policy proposal I, as shadow minister, sat down with him and said there needs to be bipartisan work done on this to get it done. That was my approach. I note the Leader of the Opposition—in a press conference in order to say, 'Look over there!' while they were reversing their position on tax cuts—said that he was up for reform. He said: 'Just come to us. I want to be constructive. I want it to be like the Howard years.' What nonsense! Here we have a policy, one of the architects of which is sitting over there as his key tactician, and he asks stupid questions like that based upon absolutely nothing. Let's be very clear here: this policy says that Australia will have the same standards that the United States has by 2028. I don't know if anyone over there has watched TV or been to the US, but one of the things I noticed— Mr ALBANESE R36 Well, apparently that's bad. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Mr ALBANESE R36 Again, the noted bipartisanship! Well, you've almost worn out Gina Rinehart's plane, mate. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Resources will cease interjecting. The member for Deakin on a point of order. Mr Sukkar 242515 We know the Prime Minister's a liar— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. Mr Sukkar 242515 He should be held to— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 You will come back to that dispatch box, you'll withdraw that comment and then you'll keep walking and leave the chamber under standing order 94(a). Mr Sukkar 242515 I withdraw. The member for Deakin then left the chamber. Government members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my right, I do not need any assistance. The Prime Minister for the remaining 25 seconds. Mr ALBANESE R36 Apparently now the offer of bipartisanship doesn't even extend to support for the US alliance. Everything is an opportunity to try and divide— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Mr Dutton 00AKI A point of order. The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the Opposition will need to state the point of order. We haven't had one on relevance. Mr Dutton 00AKI On relevance, the question, again, went to a $19,000 price increase for a Mazda CX-30. The Prime Minister refuses to address that important question. Why can't he— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. Prime Minister has seven seconds and he will remain relevant to the question. Mr ALBANESE R36 Having such a thin skin makes it easy to see the glass jaw. The SPEAKER 53517 Prime Minister's time has concluded. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The House will come to order so I can hear from the member for Robertson. Health Care 38 15:17 Dr REID 300126 Robertson My question is to the Minister for Health. How will Labor's tax cuts make sure health workers keep more of what they earn, and how does this build on the government's actions to make health care more affordable and strengthen Medicare after 10 years of cuts and neglect? 15:17 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I thank the member for his question—this talented, young emergency physician whom we are so fortunate to have as part of our government and part of this parliament. He is part of a growing team of qualified health professionals right across the parliament that are adding real value to our debate around health. I also noticed the member for Robertson up just before question time, speaking in strong support of our laws that are designed to deliver every single one of the 66,000 taxpayers in his electorate a tax cut on 1 July. Many of those workers, just like him, work in the health sector—like the third-year nurse at the Gosford Hospital who, under our laws, will receive a tax cut on 1 July of more than $1,600, around double what they would have received under the old plan from five years ago. As well as bigger, better tax cuts, the member for Robertson has also relentlessly campaigned for better and cheaper health care on the Central Coast. Indeed, that's why he ran for parliament in the first place. He saw the results of 10 years of cuts and neglect to Medicare every day he went to work as a doctor. His support for bulk-billing investments saw more than 10,000 additional free visits to the doctor on the Central Coast in just the two months of November and December last year. His delivery of the Umina Medicare urgent care clinic is already making a huge difference to his community. One of his constituents, Greg, wrote this to the member: 'Brilliant service, doc. Used this service last week. Was assessed, had X-rays, procedure done, wound cleaned and antibiotics in hand, all in the time it would have taken to find a parking spot at the Gosford Hospital. Get around it, people. A hundred per cent recommended.' After the former government ripped away the right of general practices on the Central Coast to recruit overseas trained GPs, the member for Robertson promised to reverse that decision. We've delivered on that commitment as well. The member for Robertson understands it's not easy to turn around 10 years of cuts and neglect to Medicare that were begun by the Leader of the Opposition during his disastrous period as health minister. The member for Robertson is working so hard to deliver for his community, and is delivering more doctors; delivering more free visits to the GP; delivering cheaper medicines; and, on 1 July, delivering tax cuts for every single taxpayer in his electorate. Taxation 39 15:20 Ms McKENZIE 124514 Flinders My question is to the Treasurer. Were there any discussions held by the Treasurer or any direction given by him or his office, expressly or implicitly, to the secretary or any other official of the Treasury to provide advice on stage 3 tax cuts before 11 December 2023? 15:20 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin An hour and 20 minutes into question time, on the Thursday of sitting and in the absence of the shadow Treasurer, that's the best they can come up with. I answered this question earlier in the week; I answered it accurately. The department answered it on Monday before the inquiry chaired by Senator Hume, and we all know what's happening here. The SPEAKER 53517 The Treasurer will pause. The member for Barker is on a warning. I thought it would be a week where he would not get 94(a) but some things never change. You will leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Barker then left the chamber. Dr CHALMERS 37998 I think the whole House knows what's happening here. They can't defend or sustain their position on the actual tax cuts, so they're asking questions about all of the atmospherics and everything that goes around it, because the whole country now knows that they argued against the tax cuts but say they are voting for them. The member for Farrer says, 'Absolutely, we're going to unwind it.' They're all at sea. The opposition leader can't sustain his position for longer than 30 seconds on national television. We all know what's going on here. We have put forward a program of bigger tax cuts for more Australians to help with the cost of living. If they don't want to engage on that then perhaps they should pack up and go home. Albanese Government 39 15:22 Ms RYAN 249224 Lalor My question is to the Prime Minister. Could the Prime Minister outline the government's actions over the summer? 15:22 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the Chief Government Whip for her question. Of course, she was a big supporter of the legislation introduced this week to give a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer and to make sure that these tax cuts were squarely aimed at middle Australia to make a difference for working people. But that wasn't all that happened. We had the ACCC investigating pricing and competition in supermarkets. We appointed Dr Emerson to do work as well on those issues, including the Food and Grocery Code of Conduct review. Over the summer, all 58 Medicare urgent care clinics that we promised are now up and running. We had a major Border Force crackdown on the importation of illegal tobacco. We banned importation of disposable single-use vapes. We saw an increase in bulk-billing rates as a result of tripling the bulk-billing incentive—the biggest investment in Medicare that we have seen since it was first introduced 40 years ago—and we celebrated the 40th birthday of Medicare, which is so strong it even survived this bloke as health minister. We improved metastatic cancer data collection. We had an agreement, signed by the education minister, for school funding in WA.We hope this is the first from right across the states and territories. We heard the result of our cheaper childcare. It has resulted in an 11 per cent average reduction for centre based daycare. We opened applications for the first round of funding for social and affordable housing under our Housing Australia Future Fund. We travelled to Far North Queensland and to the Gold Coast to provide assistance for people who had suffered from natural disasters. We provided support in record time, and we provided support on the ground through the Australian Defence Force and other supports. We announced hydrogen hubs in Townsville, and Bell Bay in northern Tasmania. We set national records for rooftop solar generation. And, of course, we had major progress on major infrastructure projects—the M1 extension to Raymond Terrace. The Rockhampton Ring Road is now under construction. The Orange conservatorium is up and running as well— (Time expired) Cost of Living 40 15:26 Mr PIKE 300120 Bowman My question is to the Prime Minister. Champion Support Services in Thornlands work tirelessly to support those in my community who are experiencing hardship. They reported a tripling in demand for their food relief program during 2023. If Labor's policies are working, why are food bank lines in my electorate three times as long as they were a year ago? 15:26 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Bowman for his question. It goes to the fact that many people on low and middle incomes, as well as people without work, of course, are under financial pressure. That's why we're taking action. Those opposite would have done absolutely nothing. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting. The member for Bowman has asked his question. Mr ALBANESE R36 One of the first things you can do to provide people with assistance is to ensure that they get access to a job. We've done that with more jobs created on our watch than any other new government in Australian history—650,000 of them! Not only do we want more jobs; we want them to pay more. We want them to be more secure. With the passage of the legislation across in the Senate today, that's precisely what we are doing. Those opposite think it was okay for people who are delivering food to Parliament House here or engaged in the gig economy to have absolutely no minimum standards whatsoever. Nothing! That's what they voted for. We want people to earn more. We want people to be in secure work. But there's something else we want as well. We want people to keep more of what they earn. That is why we've introduced tax cuts to assist middle Australia on low and middle incomes. Do you think maybe that people on $45,000 a year and less should get a tax cut? We do. That's why we changed the unfair system. It's so that it can deliver for people who are under financial pressure. This mob speak about doing things timely. They worry about the fact that our tax cuts will come in on 1 July, and then they say, 'But five years ago we did something.' We are doing something, as a priority, to deliver every Australian a tax cut. In addition to the tax cuts, of course, there's other legislation before the parliament that will assist 1.2 million people on modest incomes, such as the Medicare levy, to either take them out of the system completely or reduce the amount they have to pay. That's what we have done. We are about providing assistance. Those opposite complained. They said they'd oppose it, that they'd fight it, that they'd roll it back. Now, they say, 'Actually, we're going to vote in favour of it,' but they would never have done anything— (Time expired) Screen And Visual Arts Industry 40 15:29 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean My question is to the Minister for the Arts. Why is documentary an important method of revealing the true nature of Australian stories, and what happens if these stories are not told? 15:30 Mr BURKE DYW Watson Like the member for Bean, I love a good documentary. We flagged this in our cultural policy, where we particularly talked about the national broadcaster. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Casey is warned. Mr BURKE DYW On page 87 of the national cultural policy, it says: The national broadcasters are the platforms through which audiences engage with some of our best comedy, drama, documentary and children's television. Comedy, drama, documentary and children's television: Nemesis gave us all four! Mr BURKE DYW I don't want to be interrupted by the star of the show. The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Leader of the House will pause, and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition will have a real point of order—not a statement, not a joke, not a comment; if she does, there'll be consequences. Out of respect for her office, I give the Deputy Leader of the Opposition the call. Ms Ley 00AMN On the basis that this is rubbish, I move: That the member be no longer heard. The SPEAKER 53517 The question is that the minister be no longer heard.    

The House divided. [15:36]
(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

46 AYES Andrews, K. L. Archer, B. K. Bell, A. M. Birrell, S. J. Boyce, C. E. Buchholz, S. Caldwell, C. M. Chester, D. J. Coleman, D. B. Conaghan, P. J. Coulton, M. M. (Teller) Dutton, P. C. Fletcher, P. W. Gillespie, D. A. Goodenough, I. R. Hamilton, G. R. Hastie, A. W. Hawke, A. G. Howarth, L. R. Joyce, B. T. G. Landry, M. L. Leeser, J. Marino, N. B. McCormack, M. F. McIntosh, M. I. McKenzie, Z. A. O'Brien, E. L. O'Brien, L. S. Pearce, G. B. Pike, H. J. Pitt, K. J. Price, M. L. Ramsey, R. E. (Teller) Stevens, J. Tehan, D. T. van Manen, A. J. Vasta, R. X. Violi, A. A. Wallace, A. B. Ware, J. L. Webster, A. E. Willcox, A. J. Wilson, R. J. Wolahan, K. Wood, J. P. Young, T. J. 83 NOES Albanese, A. N. Aly, A. Ananda-Rajah, M. Bandt, A. P. Bates, S. J. Bowen, C. E. Burke, A. S. Burnell, M. P. Burney, L. J. Burns, J. Butler, M. C. Byrnes, A. J. Chalmers, J. E. Chandler-Mather, M. Chaney, K. E. Charlton, A. H. G. Chesters, L. M. Clare, J. D. Claydon, S. C. Coker, E. A. Collins, J. M. Conroy, P. M. Daniel, Z. Doyle, M. J. J. Dreyfus, M. A. Fernando, C. Garland, C. M. L. Gee, A. R. Georganas, S. Giles, A. J. Gosling, L. J. Haines, H. M. Hill, J. C. Jones, S. P. Kearney, G. M. Keogh, M. J. Khalil, P. King, C. F. King, M. M. H. Lawrence, T. N. Laxale, J. A. A. Le, D. Leigh, A. K. Lim, S. B. C. Marles, R. D. Mascarenhas, Z. F. A. McBain, K. L. McBride, E. M. Miller-Frost, L. J. Mitchell, B. K. Mitchell, R. G. Mulino, D. Neumann, S. K. O'Connor, B. P. J. O'Neil, C. E. Payne, A. E. Phillips, F. E. Plibersek, T. J. Rae, S. T. Reid, G. J. Repacholi, D. P. Rishworth, A. L. Roberts, T. G. Rowland, M. A. Ryan, J. C. Ryan, M. M. Scamps, S. A. Sharkie, R. C. C. Sitou, S. Smith, D. P. B. (Teller) Stanley, A. M. (Teller) Steggall, Z. Templeman, S. R. Thistlethwaite, M. J. Thwaites, K. L. Tink, K. J. Vamvakinou, M. Watson-Brown, E. Watts, T. G. Wells, A. S. Wilkie, A. D. Wilson, J. H. Zappia, A. 0 PAIRS

Question negatived.

15:43 Mr BURKE DYW Watson As I was saying, the true nature of Australian stories needs to be told. We saw with Nemesis, in only the first two episodes that we've had so far, that when they say what they're like in terms of taxes, we saw the first thing they did when they got into office was put taxes up and flatline wages. We saw, when they talk about the concerns about industrial action, we were reminded that when they didn't like Malcolm Turnbull they went on strike and shut down the entire parliament because they didn't like their boss. We then saw, with all the complaints we watched last night about the ABC from the Leader of the Opposition, that it's actually the one network that has provided a program where no-one other than members the Liberal and National parties is heard. No-one else says a word, and it's the most devastating thing for the Liberal and National brand you could ever see. I know there are three episodes, but I think we're hoping for a fourth. I know there was Star Wars:Episode IV—A New Hope. This could be episode four: 'Thug', where we get to see the reality of what's said versus what happens. Last night, the Leader of the Opposition said, 'We are more united than ever in the Liberal Party. Nobody is looking backwards.' And he's right, because, except for the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member for Riverina, the member for New England, the member for Hume, the member for Petrie, the member for Canning, the member for McPherson, the member for Leichhardt, the member for Deakin, Senator Cash, Senator Reynolds, Senator Birmingham and Senator McGrath—except for them—no-one is looking backwards at all! Not one! Absolutely none of them! The Leader of the Opposition also said they're a united party—a united party that, since the election, is four members smaller, in terms of losing the former member for Aston; the member for Calare, who went to the crossbench; the member for Monash and Senator Van. Six frontbenchers have gone, two of whom he doesn't have the courage to replace. But it ended with a cliffhanger. Episode 2 had the cliffhanger: he's going to smile more! And we all know how that ended! Mr Albanese R36 On that note, Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. DOCUMENTS 42 DOCUMENTS Presentation 42 15:46 Mr BURKE DYW Watson These 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 andProceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 42 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Albanese Government 42 15:46 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable the Leader of the Opposition proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: This Government's pattern of breaking promises and breaking trust with the Australian people. 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 t heir places— 15:46 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson Let me give you a quote: 'My word is my bond.' Who did say that, and, on 99 other occasions, give a similar promise in the same vein? It was the man that the Australian public voted for, only 18 months ago, who they have now decided is a very different person, of a very different character than he was when they voted for him in May 2022. The reality is that this Prime Minister is barely recognisable, because he has completely and utterly trashed his reputation. His word counts for nothing. There is nothing that this Prime Minister can say, no commitment that he can give, no undertaking that he can provide, no promise or assurance that he can give that the Australian public could actually reliably bank. This is a prime minister devoid of any moral character. You can't look the Australian public in the eye on 97 occasions and tell them that their power bill is going down by $275. The basis on which many Australians voted for him was that they thought their power bills were coming down. Do you know, he has not mentioned that once—not once—since being elected. Not once has he ever mentioned that figure again—97 times before the election, but not once since. What are Australians supposed to believe—that this Prime Minister is going to keep his promise; that somehow, magically, their power bills will go down by $275? It was not just on a single occasion, but each year, he promised. So, by the end of the three-year term, the Prime Minister has a lot to deliver. He's not going to, of course. He never had any intention of delivering that promise. He never thought for a moment before the election that he would be held to account for that key promise. We saw the Prime Minister in question time today, completely avoiding a straight answer to every question. He carries on with the theatrics. He was asked specifically about the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, and comments he'd made about the new car and ute tax that the Labor Party is bringing in. Over the weekend, the minister was out there saying that this will be great for emissions reductions. He cited the case of the Mazda CX-30. He said that the emissions reduction in the model of the CX-30 in the UK was dramatically less than the models sold here in Australia. As it turns out, what he said on that day was not accurate, but that comes as no surprise to anyone in this place. What he failed to mention and what the Prime Minister refused to respond to today is that, in the UK, under the fuel emission standards proposed to be brought in by this government, the CX-30 is $19,000 dearer than it is here in Australia. The Prime Minister didn't mention the figure of $19,000. He didn't mention the prospect of a price increase. How on earth can Australians afford the Labor Party? How can Australians who are under the pump at the moment with increased energy prices, with increased food prices, with increased prices for every element within their family budget afford a $19,000 increase in the price of an average family car? The answer is that they cannot. This Prime Minister is so out of because most of his time is spent with the elite in this country. We know of his relationship with Alan Joyce. He never mentions Alan Joyce these days. He used to be happy to walk the red carpet on regular occasions, have Alan Joyce over for cocktails at the Lodge and have him over for whiskey at Kirribilli. Has he mentioned him recently? No, he hasn't. But these are the people who he hangs out with. He's not talking to average families in the suburbs whose mortgage has gone up by $24,000 after tax. That's $48,000 if you're on the top marginal tax rate or $40,000 or $45,000 depending on what tax rate you're on. How on earth can the average Australian family, when they're paying over $2 a litre for petrol or diesel in this country under this government, their insurance premiums have doubled and gas is up by 30 per cent, afford the continuing bills that are mounting up under this government, let alone try to find $600, $700 or $800 out of their pay packets each week to just service their mortgage? No wonder you're seeing price rises in your grocery basket as you are taking it to the checkout. I have an enormous amount of sympathy with Australians, particularly those on lower incomes, those on fixed incomes, such as self-funded retirees, and people on bigger incomes who have higher needs because they've got a special-needs child at home, and one of the partners in that relationship has decided to stay at home. Perhaps there's a particular skill that one of the partners in that relationship or marriage has, and they've decided that they want to work, because the other partner is staying at home to take care of the children. That's a perfectly legitimate decision for that family to make. I have enormous respect for the decisions that those people have made in their own lives for the right reasons, but I desperately worry that under this government the prices that families are facing and the difficulties that Labor has created over the last two years will continue, and the damage to those families will indeed be long lasting. We haven't seen wholesale sales of assets, particularly the family home, in our country for a long period of time—not since the Labor Party was in during the Hawke-Keating period. At the moment, the banks aren't moving on families, even if they're behind in their payments, because the banks know that they don't want a run on that asset class. They know that people are sitting on considerable equity within their own homes so that, as interest continues to compound, the bank's exposure, if there is a fire sale of that asset, is not as dramatic as it would have been in this country some time ago. There is still, of course, significant underlying demand for homes in our country because the CFMEU and others, including this government, have decimated the building industry. We know, though, that those families are feeling the stress. They are feeling the stress. When we were in government, we legislated for stage 1, stage 2 and stage 3 tax cuts. Stage 1 and stage 2 were targeted at people on low and middle incomes. It was $200 billion worth of tax cuts for those people. It was voted for by the Prime Minister. It was promised on a hundred occasions. The Prime Minister went to two elections assuring the Australian public that there was no difference between the position of the coalition and the position of the party that he led. There have been $200 billion of tax cuts already provided. We know that that has been delivered, and stage 3 was scheduled to be delivered. We know that the LMITO tax offset arrangements that we put in place provided considerable assistance to people on low and middle incomes. But we know that when the Labor Party came into power they abolished that offset, which means that today Australians, only 18 months after they voted for this Prime Minister, are paying 27 per cent more personal income tax than when the Prime Minister was first elected. If you contrast those facts to the rhetoric and bluster and nonsense that we heard today, you know that this is a prime minister who can't lie straight in bed. You know that this Prime Minister, when he's lying awake at the Lodge at night, he must be lying there in bed— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Be careful, Leader of the Opposition. I'm listening to you. Mr DUTTON 00AKI He must be lying there in bed, thinking, as he lies there in bed, 'What could he do?' as he instinctively lies there in bed. As he's there, lying in bed, he's talking to the Treasurer on the phone, I'm sure. He's talking to the Treasurer on the phone— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Leader of the Opposition, please stop. I appreciate you are trying to be very careful with the language you are using, and I will remind you, as I will everyone, of standing order 90. I'm listening carefully. If you step over the line, I will pull you up. Mr DUTTON 00AKI So there he is, lying in bed, and he's on the phone to the Treasurer. He's talking about ways in which they can deceive the Australian public again. It comes instinctively. It comes instinctively to this man. As you look through the broken promises that this Prime Minister has presided over, they are many and varied. The problem is that Australians are paying the price for this government's decisions. They've had two budgets. They have made a situation that is almost unbearable for millions of Australians, and he should stand condemned for his actions and for his conduct that has misled the Australian people. (Time expired) The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Before we go any further, everybody speaking on this debate needs to be reminded of standing order 90, and I'll repeat it for you now: All imputations of improper motives to a Member and all personal reflections on other Members shall be considered highly disorderly. I give the call to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister for the Arts. 15:57 Mr BURKE DYW Watson It's not lost on me, as we get to the end of this week where the biggest national issue for weeks has been the government's tax cuts, that we've had to wait until that moment—that moment just then—for the Leader of the Opposition to want to talk about them in the House. He had Tuesday's question time. We went through all the questions. He didn't want to ask about it. He had Wednesday's question time. We went through all the questions. He wanted to talk about anything but. We had Thursday's questions. He wanted to talk about everything but. He waited until after a very long question time, which was made slightly longer because of the vote that we had about me. He had all those opportunities to be able to ask about the tax policy. None of them were taken. It's interesting: if you look at the different things the Leader of the Opposition has been saying over the years, he's always projecting. He talks about a glass jaw, but criticise him and, wow, see the reaction. He talks about being gutsy and brave and he waits until the MPI on the final day, when a whole lot of his own people have already been punted from the parliament, before he's willing to talk about it—at quarter to four, just before people are getting on planes. This is a leader of the opposition who loves to talk tough, who loves to be in there and claim that other people have a glass jaw but who is himself so highly sensitive on what he claims is a huge issue. He's right on that: the tax cuts are a huge issue. But, on that, he's not willing to have any of his arguments tested during question time when the whole nation is watching. Let's not forget how they've been all over the place on this. Let's not forget what their responses have been. When it comes to tax policy, the first reaction often gives away what people actually think. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party spoke on behalf of the opposition when she was asked not only whether they were opposed to the tax cuts but if they would roll them back. And the answer was, 'Absolutely.' 'Absolutely,' was the response. Their values won't change on this. They have always, historically, been the party of higher taxes. The Howard-Costello government had the highest tax ratio to GDP of any Australian government. The last time they were in office, in the 2014 budget after promising no new taxes, the first thing they did was introduce new taxes in their first budget. And he's claiming, 'I'm cleaning up the mess.' You were delivering surpluses, were you? Where did that end? Over there, they came in last time claiming that they would deliver a surplus in the first year and every year after that. Apparently, COVID happened in their first term. There's a show that will explain what happened in their first term! I'll send you the link! We then also had on behalf of the opposition: 'When this legislation hits parliament, we will fight it all the way. I'm digging in.' This is what digging in looks like? This is a complete capitulation where what they want to do is say: 'Yeah, we support it. We want it to happen. We're just really angry about it. It really upsets us.' The simple question for those opposite the whole way through this is: did you want the government to change its position? Or did you want it to continue to be a situation where not every Australian was going to get a tax cut? The anger has made it clear to exactly everybody that those opposite wanted a situation where 84 per cent or more of Australians were not getting a tax cut. That's what they wanted to be able to deliver. They wanted to be able to deliver a situation where the concept of every Australian getting a tax cut was not going to happen. The concept of the vast majority of Australians getting tax cuts to be better off was not going to happen. This government is functioning on two key principles, here. We want people to earn more and keep more of what they earn. Those opposite disagree at every turn on both of those principles. Every time we have taken a proposal to the Fair Work Commission arguing for people to be paid more, they've opposed it. They opposed it in the election campaign. They continued to oppose a government saying we want people to be paid more. Every time we have brought in legislation, right through to this moment right now in divisions in the Senate, those opposite have been voting to stop people from being paid more. It's right to the extent of wanting a situation where a whole lot of lowly paid gig workers should continue to have no minimum standards at all. But not only do they want people to earn less; they also want people to be taxed more. That's exactly what they've done. This might be too in house or parliamentary, but have a look at the second reading amendment that they put out that they're going to vote on later. They will vote, and it's only being moved— Mr BURKE DYW We'll see, given that you think it doesn't matter which way you vote on it, my friend. It returns to the principles of stage 3. If that's what they've moved formally in the parliament, if right at the start of this they said that was 'absolutely' their position and if their track record last time was to put taxes up the moment they got in, then I reckon it's a fair bet. I think we all know what's coming from those opposite. They are committed to a system in which middle Australia pays more tax. They are committed to a system in which Australians earn less and are taxed more. I guess the words to sum that up came from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition again. There's so much! 'This is our position. This is absolutely our position.' We know what their beliefs are, we know what they wanted to do, and we know what they did last time. It won't only be in taxation and wages policy, because nobody is an enemy of Medicare the way this Leader of the Opposition is an enemy of Medicare. That 2014 budget didn't just put income tax up; it also put a tax on every visit to the GP. When you ask people what the cornerstone of the concept of Medicare is, what the most important marker we want to be able to improve is, it's bulk-billing. If you have to pay every time, even when your doctor wants to bulk-bill, that is the end of the foundations of Medicare. That was the 2014 budget. That was the policy of the then Minister for Health who is now the Leader of the Opposition. He wanted Australians to have to pay a $7 GP tax. He wanted essential medicines to cost an extra $5 per script. We voted for cheaper medicines. Those opposite have been furious about cheaper medicines, but it's not simply that they don't want them to be cheaper—they actively have had policies to make them more expensive, and the architect of those policies is the person they have elected as their leader. He wanted to charge Australians to use emergency departments. People would have been charged for that. He froze the indexation of the Medicare rebate, undermining the viability of GP practices, and ripped out $50 billion from the hospital's budget. We can look at what they do. Sometimes you say, 'Don't look at what they say; look at what they do,' but we can look at both. They do both and they are continuing to do both. And every time they complain and get angry about the tax cuts, it's clear to every Australian that they didn't want the government to change its position. They think that was the wrong thing to do. They don't believe we should have come forward and said, 'Here is the method that has been advised to us by Treasury, that will help people with the cost of living and that will not put pressure on inflation.' They reckon we should have taken that advice, knowing as a parliament that we could do something, and done nothing with it. And not simply because they believe in doing nothing, but because they believe that every pathway should be in the opposite direction: pay people less, tax people more. It's their record, it's their belief, it's how they vote in there, it's clear in every interview that they give. You had only to watch the fury build on 7.30 last night to know it's exactly what the Leader of the Opposition has in mind. 16:07 Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 Maranoa On election night the Prime Minister said, 'No one held back, no one left behind.' That's unless you live in regional and rural Australia. And there's no greater betrayal than that of the Murray Darling Basin Plan—the plan that they have torn up and are now taking an additional 450 gigalitres away from. The Leader of the House was here in this parliament with me when it moved the legislation to protect those regional communities in 2019, and now he walks out on them and on that reform that was going to ensure regional communities survive. We are not going to take away the tools that farmers need to produce the food and fibre. Every Australian will pay the bill for the betrayal of this government. The Leader of the House, who was here as the opposition spokesman, now leaves because he knows that he worked in a bipartisan way to deliver the basin plan. To have the new government tear it up and destroy regional communities is epitomising of what this government has done to regional and rural Australia. Not only have they taken away the Murray Darling Basin Plan, ripping another 450 gigalitres of water—that's the Sydney Harbour, every year, that is taken away. That's less food and fibre, 26 per cent less production, which means supply goes down and your prices go up at the checkout. They've also taken away more than $7 billion that was put aside for water infrastructure. The member for Riverina, as the infrastructure minister, put it aside for Urannah Dam and a new swamp dam in Wyangala. It was all about giving us the tools that we need to produce food and fibre to drive down the prices that people are experiencing now. The competition minister sits across from me right now—I even tried to work with him in a bipartisan way, giving him insight into competition reform and how we actually do it. I even gave him the offer to bring forward every review. We could see that the supermarkets were not just doing farmers over but they were doing consumers over. He sat on his hands and didn't even get the ACCC involved when cattle prices went down by 60 per cent at the farm gate but came down only eight per cent at the checkout. They didn't think there was a problem. They didn't think that someone might be hurt. Oh no, I'm sorry— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Excuse me. I am not deaf. You do not need to yell at me. Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 I am not yelling at you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Well, you are. Mr LITTLEPROUD 265585 May I say, the opportunity has been there. Unfortunately, we worked in a bipartisan way, but, no, they knew best. They knew best and turned their backs. But it gets worse. Next week this government is going to bring in a fresh food tax. They are going to charge Australian farmers a tax to pay for the biosecurity costs of their foreign competitors bringing their product into this country, putting it on the shelves and competing against them. In what parallel universe would a government impose a tax on its own farmers to pay for their foreign competitors to bring their products into this country and put them on a shelf to compete against them? We don't get that treatment when we export to other countries. We pay for the export risks that we pose when we take our products into those export markets. But, no, not here in Australia. In its wisdom, this government is saying, 'No, farmers, you can pay for those biosecurity costs of your foreign competitors. That's the way that we work here.' That's going to be passed on to every Australian consumer. Farmers cannot absorb another tax by this government—and that's after the government have already put on a truckie tax. I understand that the road user charge has been increased by over 16½ per cent since this government came into effect. That means that it costs more to get a product from a paddock to your plate. That means Australians are paying more. When you look at what's driving inflation, the drivers of inflation are your energy bill and your food bill. This government is only driving up the food bill because of the way in which and the disdain with which they have treated regional and rural Australia and our farmers. When you look at the supply chains, the reason the supply chains are in trouble is that they abolished the agriculture visa. That was the first step, and now we have the skills commissioner saying, 'Lo and behold, we might need an ag visa to be able to have the labour supply to pick the product that gets onto your plates.' Then they made the PALM scheme so unworkable that farmers now have to pay for workers to lie on the couch and do nothing when it's raining. They haven't heard of this thing called rain and that, when it rains, no-one works and that you pay somebody who's not working? No, not this government, because it's being run ideologically off the AWU and everyone else. Australians are paying more because of the breach of faith of this government with regional and rural Australia. If regional and rural Australia hurts, all of Australia hurts. 16:12 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper When you get to the end of your life, you like to look back and you like to think, 'Did I make a difference? Have I left a legacy? Am I going to leave the world in a slightly better place?' For some people it might be that they've raised their kids well. They might have volunteered on the footy team. They might have put in where other people haven't. They might have left this place with something they've invented to make life better. We, here in this place, are given the absolutely amazing privilege of changing the laws of this land to make this life better. We have an amazing privilege: to do our very best to change people's lives, to make people's lives something better so they get opportunity. I've got to say that I have never, ever been so proud or honoured to have that privilege in this place as I have in the last few months. It's a great honour to be an assistant minister in the Albanese Labor government, where I know that we have made such a significant difference to people's lives right around Australia. I've spent the last few months in my own electorate of Cooper, in Melbourne's inner north, as well as travelling to the Gold Coast, to rural Victoria and right across the country to Western Australia. It's great, because I get to see firsthand the changes that this government has made and the positive impacts that the Labor government is having. I get the opportunity to listen to Australians from all walks of life. They have been telling us that they are doing it tough. They have been telling us that they are under pressure. They've been telling us that their budgets are being stretched to the limit. It's such a great opportunity for me and the rest of us in this government to tell them that we are doing everything in our power to deal with these issues that have cropped up for them in their everyday lives. They know, and we explained to them, that we have had a once-in-100-years pandemic. There are wars across the world. There are supply-chain disruptions. There has been a global inflation spike. These are things that nobody could predict would happen—things that have popped up in the time that we have been in government. They know now, because we have responded so well, that they can trust us like they have never trusted a Liberal-National government. The Liberal-National government didn't care about working people. They didn't act on climate change. In fact, they didn't act to help working people. They actively wanted to keep wages low. We heard that from one of their own previous ministers. There was no investment in Medicare. Bulk-billing rates were in absolute freefall. They left behind billions of dollars of debt with virtually nothing to show for it and an absolute deficit of trust in Australian politics and government. The one most responsible for that was their previous Prime Minister. The people I speak to know this. They know this because they voted for change. They wanted them, on that side of the House, out. Workers, women, people who use our health system, aged-care residents, climate activists, teachers, aged-care workers: they knew they could not trust that government to act in their own interests, and they voted them out. They voted a government in that cares—a Labor government—and they have put their trust in us to do the right thing. I am so proud that they now can have absolute faith that we will always act in their interests. I am proud to say that we have a prime minister who can sleep soundly and sleep straight in bed, unlike many of those that we have seen who are probably struggling—they are admitting so on a TV show that we've been watching over the last few weeks. But they have absolute proof now that they can trust the Prime Minister to respond to changes that are happening in the world and to do the right thing. They wanted trust restored in Australian politics after lies and deceit from a prime minister who secretly swore himself into multiple ministries. They voted for higher pay after wages had stagnated for years. They voted for better working conditions after those opposite attacked their rights time and time again. They voted to strengthen Medicare and cheaper medicines. They voted for action on climate change and for respect and a better deal for women, who were told they were lucky they didn't get shot when they tried to tell the Prime Minister what they wanted. They voted for a government they could trust to do the right thing and a government that makes hard decisions like they did about changing the stage 3 tax cuts, because they know this government can be trusted to act in their interests. 16:17 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon Talk about leaving a legacy! What a shameful legacy this government is leaving this country already, with a prime minister who looked the Australian people in the eye and lied to them ahead of an election. That is the legacy that is being left by this government. It wasn't just about stage 3 tax cuts. It wasn't just about the Murray-Darling Basin. It wasn't just about the $275 that your electricity bill was going to go down by. It was also when it came to immigration. Let's have a look at what the Prime Minister said before the last election: 'Albo rules out migrant intake.' 'Anthony Albanese has signalled Labor won't back the return of mass immigration.' In the papers: 'Albo: mass migration is out.' This is the Prime Minister before the last election. This is the shadow minister for home affairs before the last election: 'Do we want migrants to return in the same numbers? The answer is no.' That is the Prime Minister and his opposition before the last election. What is the reality now? What did the Prime Minister say before the election and what is the reality now? There has been record Australian migration and no effort whatsoever to make sure that housing is in pace with it, no effort to make sure that rents and rent availability is in pace with it, no effort to make sure that congestion doesn't occur by boosting infrastructure and no effort to put more doctors out into communities. The Prime Minister said one thing before the last election, and, lo and behold, he's done the complete opposite after the election. What has that meant? It's meant that we now have a housing crisis in this country that's making housing unaffordable, particularly for young Australians, and we now have a rental crisis in this country. We've seen rental availability at the lowest level ever in this country. We have young people trying to get rental accommodation turning up, and there are 60 people competing with them for one single room. Try seeing a doctor at the moment. Try and get a GP right across this country. Can you get one? No, you can't. What about congestion? We saw infrastructure spending cut by this government once they got into office. Instead of those suburbs where we're seeing pressure on growth getting the trains that they need and getting the freeways and the roads that they need built, that's been cut. What is this doing to the lives of everyday Australians? It's making it worse. It's making it harder. It's putting pressure on inflation, which means it's putting pressure on the cost of living, which means it's putting pressure on interest rates, and it's making their lives harder. What is it based on? It's based on the Prime Minister saying one thing before the last election and doing the complete opposite afterwards. The shameful thing we've seen this week is an arrogant, out-of-touch prime minister come in here and not be apologetic for it. He hasn't been apologetic for saying one thing before an election and doing completely the opposite afterwards. I'll say this to all those opposite: you might think that you're short-term game is going to help you when it comes to Dunkley, but we and the Australian people are going to remind you of every single broken promise this Prime Minister has made during his time in government. We are going to keep reminding the Australian people that this Prime Minister said one thing before the election on numerous occasions and has done the exact opposite when he's been in power. (Time expired) 16:22 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo It's been quite an extraordinary week, and I can't really get past why the opposition is so angry. What we've got is a prime minister who said—on the stage 3 tax cuts that were legislated by those opposite, which disproportionately favoured people earning over $180,000—that, because of the economic circumstances and because of the pressure that low- and middle-income earners were under, we should now share that with them. What the Prime Minister has done, and what our government has done, is, rather than all of us getting a massive tax cut, share that with the people who care for our children, the people who clean this parliament, the people who cut our hair and the people who sell us our groceries at the supermarket. They are outraged because the Prime Minister has done the right thing for low- and middle-income earners. Do they not understand that everybody else out there who are low- and middle-income earners—who are the people cleaning our homes, who are cleaning this parliament, who are doing the lawns, who are making sure that our children are cared for and who are making sure that our mothers and grandmothers are cared for in aged care—are going: 'So he's decided to share the tax cut with all of us? He's a pretty good bloke for doing that.' That's what you're doing each and every time that you say it's a broken promise. You're reminding all of those low- and middle-income earners that the Prime Minister had the courage to do what was right because the economic circumstances have changed. That is what this government does. We evolve with the times and go, 'What needs to change?', unlike a previous opposition leader who became Prime Minister. Let's just remember what Tony Abbott did. He stood up on the eve of the 2013 election and said there would be no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no cuts to the ABC and the SBS, no changes to the pension. That is what he said. And what did he do the moment he became Prime Minister, in his first budget? He slashed education funding. Our public schools have fallen so far behind we now have an education minister working to fix the funding gap in our public schools. We have a health system we are trying to resurrect and rebuild. The previous government cut many billions of dollars from our healthcare system and then tried to impose a GP tax on people who were turning up at public hospitals. This was from a government who said in opposition there would be no cuts to health. Let's not even talk about the cuts to the SBS and the ABC, so much so that the SBS said it was a direct correlation to their funding cuts that they had to introduce paid advertising. Then there were the broken promises on pensions and the cuts that they had to pensions. It is this government, when coming to office, who said, 'We have to turn this around.' Maybe it is just a bit of self-interest for those opposite because they were banking on that big tax cut that they and their mates were going to get. We are asking them to think of everybody else. Think of all the people in all your communities—rural, regional, women—who will benefit from these changes. This is good tax policy. It is restoring integrity to our tax system. It is dealing with bracket creep. The opposition's version of dealing with bracket creep is to abolish the brackets. That is not dealing with bracket creep; that is abolishing brackets and flattening our tax system. That is not good tax policy. That would see all the benefit going to those at the top end of town and not flowing through. Our tax reform is making sure that every Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut. Those opposite will still get a very generous tax cut. But we are now saying you need to share that tax cut with your own staff, with your own people in your community, with the person who is serving the food, working at the petrol station, caring for your kids, caring for your parents. Be fair, do the right thing. This is what a responsible government would do. 16:27 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler I mean, the fabricator, the fibber, the storyteller, the beguiler, the cheater, the deceiver, the slicker, the trickster. This Prime Minister has broken so many promises, I am surprised he has not been diagnosed with mythomania. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Remember standing order 90, please, member for Hinkler. I stated it at the beginning of the debate. Let's not let this slide into imputation. Mr PITT 148150 Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Speaker, for the guidance. Mythomania is a real condition. But look at the broken promises. This government, this Prime Minister, committed to the Australian people: that mortgage costs would go down—broken; that cost-of-living would be lower under this government—broken; that electricity prices would be lower under this government—broken; that gas would be cheaper—broken; that there would be no changes to superannuation—broken; that they wouldn't change to stage 3 tax cuts—broken; and that there would be no changes to negative gearing and death duties. Well, they haven't broken that one yet but there is still time, and I can tell you why. Because in today's Australian, 'go get negative gearing' the ALP is told—go get negative gearing. How do we know they are lining up to break this promise? Quite simply, because in 2019 it was their policy. In fact, it was costed. If you look up the Parliamentary Budget Office, here it is: the Australian Labor Party's costed policy for negative gearing changes and that will raise, even from then, almost $3 billion in additional taxes. So this government cannot tell the truth. They have broken that list of promises. It is costing the Australian people an absolute fortune. We keep hearing about Nemesis. I can tell you where the nemesis is. He sits behind the Prime Minister; it is the Treasurer. He was quoted as saying 'heads, I win; tails, he loses' if the Prime Minister breaks his promise on stage 3 tax reforms and that is what has happened. So, Prime Minister, the person you need to look for is behind you. He is the one who wants your job, he is the one who wants you out of business and he is the one who is doing everything possible to destroy your reputation and make you look bad before the Australian people. I've got to tell you: he's doing a pretty good job of that but not as the Treasurer. ADJOURNMENT 49 ADJOURNMENT Climate Change, Cost of Living 49 16:30 Mr BATES 300246 Brisbane It's 2024 and we're back for our first sitting week of the year. How's the state of the country at the moment? It's not great. In my home state of Queensland it has been another summer of unbearable heat, humidity, relentless rain, floods and two cyclones in as many months. The Bureau of Meteorology has warned of the risk of further bouts of heavy rain. Flooding has become a constant concern for many residents in my electorate. It's taking an emotional and financial toll. In fact, the cost of home and contents insurance has been rising rapidly due to inflation and the increasing frequency of these disasters, leaving even those who shop around facing significantly higher premiums year after year. Recent research has shown that the cost of home and contents insurance has risen 25 per cent in one year alone. These figures are the average cost. For some homeowners, such as those living in flood-prone areas in my electorate, the premium increases will be much, much higher. It is now at the stage where some homes across Brisbane are uninsurable. Flooding and disasters are so frequent that insurance agencies won't even put a top-dollar price on the risk. So who is paying for these impacts of climate change? It's not the fossil fuel industry. Australian taxpayers are still spending over $11 billion a year propping them up with financial subsidies. We've learned that the government collects more revenue from HECS fees than it gets from oil and gas taxes. But it doesn't have to be this way. Take Norway for example. They tax the fossil fuel industry to support free university education and countless other benefits to society. But over here we charge students a fortune to go to university so that we can afford to subsidise the fossil fuel industry. We are one of the wealthiest countries in the world; we can do better than this. You can't transition away from fossil fuels while you are actively expanding them. The polluter-pays principle needs to be at the heart of any genuine reform debate. Look at Qatar: they export less gas than we do but collect more than 20 times the amount of tax on it. Instead of propping up corporations, we could be supporting universal services that Australians really need right now, like health care and housing. It's become glaringly obvious how much corporate greed is really costing us. Skyrocketing prices on food, increased rents and bills mean that people simply can't afford life's essentials. While Coles and Woolies make off with huge profits, Australians are struggling to buy food and to keep a roof over their heads. These big corporations have too much power, and they can charge whatever they like. It's these superprofits that are driving a vast amount of inflation. The finances of so many Australians are being stretched so thin. So many people are coming to the realisation that they are just one rate rise or one rental increase away from homelessness. This is no way to run a society. Residents from across my electorate have contacted me in distress because they are unable to afford or access timely health care, particularly bulk-billing GP services. In fact, just five per cent of new GP appointments in my electorate are bulk billed. Access to high-quality health care, including mental health care, is a basic human right. I have lived in the United States. I have seen and lived the consequences of a flailing health system where people are forced to, quite literally, choose between rent or the medicine that they need to survive. That is not freedom. That is not a choice that any human being should be forced to make, yet it seems to be a future that both the major parties want to create for us. Tinkering around the edges of a healthcare system in structural decline will not solve this crisis. Instead of leaving basic human needs like housing and health care up to the market and big corporations, the government needs to start focusing on its priorities and to look after people. Instead of propping up the fossil fuel industry we could be building more public housing, getting dental and mental health into Medicare and easing the cost-of-living crisis. We need to build a society and economy that work for all of us, not just those at the top. Health Care 50 16:34 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa As we enter February, the holiday season is well and truly over. School has resumed; university is about to start, and life with all its busyness and daily routines is in full swing. A regular aspect of our daily routine should be making sure our health is taken care of. Thankfully in Australia we have Medicare. Uniquely Australian, Medicare celebrates its 40th birthday this month. Proudly a Labor initiative, Medicare means that everyone has equal and fair access to the best healthcare system in the world. Often when we read about healthcare systems we focus on the acute side of care—that is, our hospitals and emergency departments. While they're important and vital, it is of course best not to end up in there in the first place. Prevention and early detection are surely the keys to staying out of hospital. In truth, in the past few years life has been anything but normal. It's been disjointed and fractured. As a result, many haven't kept up to date with their regular check-ups at their GPs or specialists. Sadly, the flow-on effect of this will endure long after the COVID pandemic. With the crisis of the pandemic receding, there's no longer any excuse to put off those regular check-ups. The announcement this week of the cancer diagnosis for King Charles shows that everyone is at risk. I wish the King a speedy recovery to good health. I know that often we're afraid to do those preventive tests lest we get a result that changes the course of our life or that of our loved ones. They are normal and understandable fears, but ignorance in these matters is not bliss. We have the responsibility to ourselves and our families to take care of our health and ensure we do our screening tests. Our lives can often depend on it. A common screening test that Australians are familiar with is the one for bowel cancer. We know that 90 per cent of cases, if found early, can successfully be treated, and Australians aged between 50 and 74 receive a screening test kit every two years. It's a simple, easy test to complete and it can save your life. While the participation rate has increased since 2014, that number has decreased in the past few years and is sitting around 40 per cent—nowhere near high enough. Similarly, women across Australia between the ages of 50 and 74 receive a letter every two years to participate in a free mammogram to help detect breast cancer early. One in seven women in Australia will develop breast cancer in their life, and the earlier this is found the easier it is to treat. But early detection relies on screenings. Recently, I had my own regular mammogram, and I'd like to thank Vicki and Juliana, the two wonderful staff at BreastScreen in Liverpool who took care of me when I was called back for further screening. It can be an uncomfortable and sometimes awkward test, but amazing professionals around Australia like Vicki and Juliana make it easier for all of us. Women should also participate in cervical screening tests, and, whilst the rates of participation there are relatively high, at 68 per cent, we can do more to increase these numbers. Let's not forget that in Australia, the lifestyle of sport, beach and sun leaves us exposed to skin damage. Every 30 minutes in Australia someone is diagnosed with melanoma. Thankfully 99 per cent of skin cancers are curable, but they need to be detected early. The simplest and most effective method is to get a regular skin check at your GP or skin clinic. Bowel cancer, breast cancer, cervical cancer, skin cancer or melanoma—they devastate far too many lives, but all of these cancers can be successfully treated with early detection. For each of these cancers there is a simple yet incredibly effective screening test available to all Australians. As Australians, we need to be there for our families and our loved ones, so please make sure that you get them. After the horrors of the past few years, let us do our bit and make 2024 the year of health screening, of making sure that your vaccinations are up to date and of preventive health in general. Surely that is the best new year's resolution of all. The SPEAKER 53517 Well said, member for Werriwa. Parkes Electorate: Wilcannia Weir Replacement Project 51 16:39 Mr COULTON HWN Parkes I'd like to bring to the attention of the House an issue that's very concerning in my electorate, and that is the design, and the change of the design, to the weir at Wilcannia. This project has been in the pipeline for a long time. It's been mooted for years—decades, even. But, in more recent times, when the member for Maranoa was the water minister, he and I and the New South Wales water minister at the time, Niall Blair, went to Wilcannia and announced $15 million from each government for the construction of a weir. Over that period of time, there have been some issues. There's been COVID-19. We've had a flood as well. But there's been extensive consultation with the local community about location and design. The agreement was that the new weir—and I should say there's a weir that's been there for a hundred-odd years that is crumbling and in a state of decay—was to raise the level a metre above the existing weir. It was further downstream. It was to have had gates, to enable down-river flows in the Darling River in dry times, to put a run of water down the lower Darling, as we've had serious trouble over the years in that part of the river. It was to have had a fish ladder as well. Somewhere over the last six months or so, within the New South Wales public service, they have changed this design from a substantial concrete weir to an earth-and-rock construction—basically, a pile of rocks in the river—with no gates and no higher than the existing weir. The town of Wilcannia is like most of my river communities: when there's water in the river for those communities, the welfare, wellbeing and mental health of those communities are much better. This weir was not only going to raise the water level and give a more long-lasting or permanent water hole; it was going to back up the river for about 30 kilometres and also give some assistance to landholders and graziers further up. One of the reasons I'm raising this now is that I'm not sure that Minister Plibersek has been made aware of the changes that New South Wales has made. I will follow up with the minister and her office. Clearly the Commonwealth government has a stake in this, because the press release that the minister put out on 18 August 2022 mentions the gates and mentions raising the river. So, clearly, there has been some form of change made at the state level. I'm a little suspicious, because there have been a lot of proposals for weirs down the river system for a number of years, and, for some reason, they seem to get held up and not get built. I am suspicious that there is a culture in the New South Wales public service that is opposed to weirs. I will say this much: there has been a lot of discussion in the last 12 months about the welfare of our Aboriginal brothers and sisters, but all I seem to see is proposals that make their life harder. This is just another one. It's taking an extra 450 gigalitres out of the system. One of the biggest employers of Aboriginal people is water. We're now seeing an attack from the Greens on the mining sector. One of the biggest employers—say, at Gunnedah and Narrabri—is the mining sector, for Aboriginal people. This weir was going to make a significant difference to the wellbeing of the people of the town. The Floodplain Association and the floodplain graziers association of the far west were very supportive of this. They need this proposal. We need to make sure that New South Wales reverses this ridiculous decision, sticks to the plan that had been agreed upon, between not only state and federal governments but also the local community, and get this thing built, because the local community is incredibly upset at this last change of events. Bean Electorate: Australia Day Awards 51 16:44 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean Some 18 residents in my electorate of Bean received awards and recognition in the civilian categories of the Australia Day 2024 Honours List. I would like to take this opportunity to recognise all of them for their service to our community and country. In the Member of the Order of Australia category, three residents in Bean were recognised for their service and contributions. Emeritus Professor Hilton Kobus was recognised for significant service to forensic science through governance and administrative roles. He has been an emeritus professor of forensic science at Flinders University and has held leadership positions in various forensic science organisations, such as Forensic Science South Australia, the National Institute of Forensic Science, the Senior Managers of Australian and New Zealand Forensic Laboratories group and the Australia and New Zealand Forensic Science Society. Emeritus Professor Christian Lueck was recognised for significant service to neurology and neuro-ophthalmology through medical research and clinical practice. Professor Lueck has been emeritus professor and former chief investigator at the Australian National University. He co-founded clinical units at Canberra Health Services and is a former president of the national body the Neuro-Ophthalmology Society of Australia. Finally, Ivan Slavich was recognised for significant service to business and to the community through governance and philanthropic endeavours. Ivan is a former CEO of Capital Football and Soldier On. He has held leadership positions with Service One Alliance Bank, the Canberra Business Chamber and TransACT Communications, among other roles. His philanthropic endeavours include fundraising for Camp Quality and through Movember and March On. In the Medal of the Order of Australia category, I would like to recognise and congratulate Stephanie Armstrong for her service to Indigenous health and education. Stephanie is a consultant on First Nations education and health, and she has also run reconciliation committees, Indigenous health networks and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education programs. Vicki Brown was recognised for service to education and to the community. Vicki is a former teacher and has held leadership roles with organisations including ACT Children's Week, ACT Playgroups, Marymead Child and Family Centre and the ACT School Board Forum. Kyira Cox was recognised for service to softball. Kyira has been a national umpire-in-chief for Softball Australia and an international umpire, including at the Tokyo Olympics, and she has received prestigious awards such as Umpire of the Year from the World Baseball Softball Confederation and Softball Australia. David Hatherly was recognised for service to the community of the Australian Capital Territory. David has been a dedicated volunteer with the State Emergency Services, the Australian Red Cross, the University of the Third Age and community orchestras and for various cultural and environmental causes. Elizabeth Dawes was recognised for service to the community through social welfare organisations. Elizabeth has worked with Lifeline as a telephone crisis counsellor for 45 years. Wendy Parsons was recognised for her service to animal welfare. Wendy is a former president of ACT Rescue and Foster, a non-profit association of volunteers who rescue and rehome unwanted dogs in Canberra and the surrounding regions. Lastly, Roy Teymant was recognised for service to chess. Roy is the president, chief organiser and passionate promoter of the Canberra Chess Club. I'd like to congratulate the following Public Service Medal recipients in Bean: Nicholas Housego, for outstanding public service in developing and embedding the practice of facilitation services within government departments; Jonathan Kobus, for outstanding public service to the Canberra and region tourism industry through the COVID-19 pandemic; Jenny Priest, for outstanding public service in leading the delivery of business support grants to businesses in the ACT impacted by COVID-19; Charmaine Smith, for outstanding public service to the ACT government's COVID-19 vaccination program, as just one part of a great public service career; and Chantelle Stratford, for outstanding public service in leadership and innovation in gender equality and women's policy within the Australian government. In addition to these fine recipients, I would also like to recognise and extend my congratulations to recipients of the Australian Police Medal, Peter Dean and Detective Chief Inspector Neil Grey, as well as the Australian Corrections Medal recipient, Dean Smith, for their critical roles in keeping our community safe. National Disability Insurance Scheme 52 16:49 Dr GILLESPIE 72184 Lyne I rise to talk about the unsustainability of the National Disability Insurance Scheme. It started off as a great scheme, in theory, created because the previous disability support scheme that was run state-by-state was failing. The Gillard government at the time put together a deal—an incredibly generous, open-ended deal—with the states to sign them on. It was a noble but very unsustainable financial model. In 2011, when it was first proposed, there were going to be 460,000 participants and the sum cost was to be, at the top end, $13.5 billion, with contributions of state budgets into the pool and the Commonwealth topping that up. Today, the NDIS is way over those numbers, with 610,000 people. As to what it costs the taxpayers, it's not $13.5 billion. They got the numbers wrong. So, when you add another 200,000, you might get up to $26 billion if it's at that pay rate. But no—it costs $35 billion annually, and it's growing. And that's from the NDIS review figures. The amazing thing is: that same review identified that there are 145,000 children under nine who are now participants. I didn't know that we had that many children who are so severely disabled that they need to go on the NDIS. The same review sets out that, by 2032-33, if the current policy settings remain, it will cost $92 billion a year. At the moment, it costs more than Medicare rebates for 25½ million people; Medicare itself was in that same price range. There is something wrong here. I know that the disability ministers have got together, even though the states have abandoned their historical and constitutional involvement in it. And the ministers have committed to getting more non-NDIS services—the traditional community support that states delivered, that they seem to have totally abandoned—or foundational supports available outside the NDIS. Looking at the details in the report of the review and the recommendations, it's just moving the costs of an incredibly expensive, unsustainable system into a different column. Part of the reason it has run this far is that it is an open-ended system, a so-called demand-driven system. But there is a huge industry that's grown up around it. When you look at the NDIA charge out rates by NDIA providers, you can see why it's having huge effects on other care industries. People in my electorate have come to me over this issue. I've had to visit day-care centres, newly built centres, that can't staff their childcare centres. They've actually got rooms in mothballs because their workers have gone to be personal-care workers, earning considerably more than what they get after having done a childcare certificate II, III or IV course. We've got a shortage of nurses and personal-care workers in the aged-care system. It's the same thing: a lot of them are going over to work in the new—they're popping up all the time—NDIS service providers. I have had people being brought out to Australia from the Pacific island labour scheme to work in abattoirs, and after a month—and all these people had done heaps of work to get them out and get them housed—most of the 20-odd workers had ended up getting jobs in the NDIA. So there are people that lose a lot of, or have a shortage of, workers in the semiskilled space. All this work is now costing more, but all the people in it have moved over to the NDIS, and clearly it's unsustainable. They need to do more. They need to cap the cost of it now and then start working out a way to make it more efficient. There are way too many people applying to get on it. Yet, at the same time, there are too many on— (Time expired) Mansford, Brigadier George, AM 53 16:54 Mr GOSLING 245392 Solomon Service, in and out of uniform, is a vocation—a calling. We were reminded of this on Monday as we read some of the 103,000 names on the honour roll at the Australian War Memorial during the Last Post ceremony. But some names are not yet embossed on bronze plaques; some heroes are still with us. One of those outstanding Australians is Brigadier 'Warrie' George Mansford AM—a living legend to the Army, to the Australian Defence Force and to the veteran community. Brigadier Mansford is a decorated soldier and general, a patriotic defender of democracy and freedom and an accomplished poet and author of the bookThe Mad Galahs. He is a truly great Australian. He was born in Guildford in Western Australia 1934. Brigadier Mansford enlisted in the regular army in 1951 and soon after joining the Army served in the Korean War with the 1st Battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment; then as a rifleman in the 2nd Battalion of the Royal Australian Regiment in the Malayan Emergency, from 1955 to 1957; and then on a second tour there from 1959 to 1961. These were as well as tours on the Thai border, in Vietnam, in Papua New Guinea and in Singapore. He was commissioned from the ranks in 1964 and served for four decades before finally retiring in 1990—incidentally, the year that I joined the Army. On his illustrious service record, Brigadier Mansford raised and commanded the Army's battle school, now named the Jungle Training Wing, in Tully in Far North Queensland. The centre reminds its trainees of the rigours of past Australian deployments in South-East Asia. Soon after joining, I was attached to the 1st Battalion Royal Australian Regiment, to one of their infantry platoons, as part of what the Defence Academy—ADFA, here in Canberra—called 'motivational training'. I recall travelling to Townsville and then up to Tully to join in with the jungle training. It was very wet, muddy and stinking hot; it was a great eye-opener to the demands of close country patrolling, fighting and soldiering. Near the Wing headquarters in Tully there hung a sign with a motivational quote from 'Warrie' George which simply said: 'The oath to serve your country did not include a contract for the normal luxuries and comforts enjoyed within our society. On the contrary, it implied hardships, loyalty and devotion to duty, regardless of rank.' That sense of service as a noble end in and of itself is something I admired immensely in George Mansford's ethos. It's a Kennedy-esque sentiment, a world away from the current recruitment theme that asks what the ADF can do to benefit the recruit—to kickstart their career and serve their needs. At one Remembrance Day, George asked whether we honoured our past properly, or if we paid only lip service to old-fashioned-sounding words like 'honour' while inwardly cringing at their use? He posed that question and said: We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. That's as CS Lewis so aptly observed. By that definition, Brigadier Mansford is as broad-chested a man as I have ever known: honourable, loyal and brave—an exemplar like the thousands whose boots sank into the Tobruk sands, or those who fired with frostbitten fingers in Korea or those who fought infection, dengue and the enemy lurking behind ankle-catching vines in the oppressively humid jungles of South-East Asia, where Australian patriots have signed up to serve. They are heroes, all of them, and models for us all to emulate—as George Mansford himself certainly is. He once wrote, 'Our precious way of life is worth fighting for.' God bless you and keep you, George. Your duty is done. House adjourned at 16:59 NOTICES 54 NOTICES Presentation 54