2024-02-13 2 1 0 House of Reps 0 1

Tuesday, 13 February 2024

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

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS 1 MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS National Apology to the Stolen Generations: 16th Anniversary 1 Reference to Federation Chamber 8 12:51 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare that the resumption of debate on the motion to take note of the Prime Minister's statement on the 16th anniversary of the National Apology to Australia's Indigenous Peoples and the Closing the Gap annual report and implementation plan is referred to the Federation Chamber. BILLS 8 BILLS Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024, Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024, Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2024, Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023, National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024, Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024 8

Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024

Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024

Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2024

Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023

National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024

Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024

Reference to Federation Chamber 8 12:52 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I declare that, unless otherwise ordered, the following bills stand referred to the Federation Chamber for further consideration: (1) the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024 at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024; (2) the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024 and Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024 at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024; and (3) the Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2024, Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023, National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024 and the Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024 at the adjournment of the debate on the motion for the second reading of each bill. Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024, Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024 9

Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024

Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024

Second Reading 9 12:53 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin I'm rising to signal our support for the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024. The FATA bill, in particular, is a two-schedule bill to triple the fees for acquiring established residential dwellings and to double vacancy fees in the foreign investment framework. The increase in fees is self-evidently designed to target vacant housing supply and to support housing in this country. Schedule 1 of the bill amends the act to increase the fee cap, the maximum fee that can be imposed by the regulations, to $7 million. The schedule also amends the indexation provisions that apply to the fee cap to ensure a more consistent and coherent indexation process for that fee cap and for all amounts in the foreign investment framework. Schedule 2 of the bill amends the regulations to triple foreign investment application fees for the purchase of established dwellings and double the vacancy fees for all foreign-owned dwellings purchased on or after 9 May 2017. This results in a sixfold increase in vacancy fees, with the tripling of the foreign investment application fees for the purchase of established dwellings, the doubling of vacancy fees for established dwellings and the doubling of vacancy fees for new dwellings purchased, as I said, on or after 9 May 2017. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024 is a single-schedule bill that seeks to clarify the legal status of FIRB fees and levies as they relate to double taxation agreements. We understand that this bill follows media reports that FIRB fees have been questioned as to whether they contravene certain double taxation agreements. This specific concern has, we understand, been prompted by analysis that, in particular, eight double taxation agreements that contain non-discrimination articles may create enforceable rights within the Australian domestic law, which is against the conventions of the interrelation between treaties and domestic law. Therefore, we understand, this amendment clarifies that, where a provision of a tax treaty that is given the force of law under the agreements act is inconsistent with a Commonwealth, state or territory law that imposes tax other than Australian tax, that provision of the tax treaty will not operate to the extent of that inconsistency, therefore ensuring that the Commonwealth, state or territory tax—here, the FIRB fees or vacancy tax—continues to apply as intended. Whilst the coalition will be supporting this quite limited bill, we know that these measures don't even come close to addressing so many of the issues that we are seeing in the housing market and, in particular, the impact on Australian housing that has emanated from the mismanaged immigration program of this government. We have seen, sadly, over the last 18 months a complete abrogation of responsibility, particularly from the Minister for Housing, who has been missing in action when necessary. Last year we saw migration ratcheted up to more than half a million people. More than half a million people were invited to this country last year, with absolutely no understanding from the government, absolutely no plan from the government, about where on earth those people would live. In an environment where we've got record low vacancy rates, housing approvals down, builds down, first home buyers down and rents up, you'd think that would almost be the worst possible time to ratchet up migration to record levels. You'd think that, around the cabinet table, the housing minister would assert some authority and say: 'Hold on a minute. In an environment where we've got record low vacancy rates, fewer homes being built, fewer homes being approved, rents going up, record low levels of first home buyers, now is not the time to ratchet up migration.' Clearly the housing minister, who has been missing for a very long time, did not make that intervention, because what do we see? We continue to see a migration program completely out of step with the housing challenges of this country. We see, instead, the Minister for Housing proposing to have more meetings with state and territory colleagues. We saw the Treasurer in his first budget make grandiose commitments to build a million homes, and then he made it 1.2 million homes. We see in the paper today that, when you analyse the approvals data—the record low number of homes being built—the government are going to miss their targets by 400,000. Four hundred thousand fewer homes will be built in the next five years than were built in the five years preceding this government, even with a record level of migration. This bill, while we'll support it, is the absolute definition of fiddling while Rome burns. This is trying to be seen to be doing something when you have absolutely no idea—when you are bereft of ideas—of what to do. We know that the government cannot meet their 1.2 million homes commitment. The question is just how far they'll miss it by. Is it 200,000? Is it 300,000? Is it 400,000? Are they going to miss it by half a million? That's really the only question now: how many houses short will they be? In that environment we continue to have a migration program that's completely disconnected from the building of new homes. Sadly, for Australians it means: if you thought we had a housing crisis in 2023, you ain't seen nothing yet for 2024, thanks to this government. While that's happening, with this bill that is going to increase fees for a very tiny number of homes, we fiddle as Rome burns. Let's also remember that when seeking to implement vacancy charges—and this is not addressed in the bill, but I would highly recommend the housing minister do some work on it—you have to actually ensure that the vacancy fees are enforced. It's all very well to have a process whereby foreign buyers of Australian residential property must declare that a property is vacant and pay the fee, but, as most Australians would know, you have to actually enforce the rules. Government and agencies need to enforce the rules themselves, because not everybody who has a vacant property is going to put their hand up and voluntarily hand over the extra tax. There doesn't seem to be anything in this bill or anything from the government on how on earth this will be enforced. How on earth will you determine whether a property that's been bought by a nonresident of Australia is being kept vacant or not? What coordination is there between the federal government and state governments to ensure that happens? When state governments investigate whether a property is vacant it's typically through utilities. Examining water and electricity consumption is how you determine whether a property is vacant. What is being done to enforce these rules? Does this bill just require very honest, well-intentioned foreign owners to put their hand up and say: 'Sorry; I kept the property vacant this year. Let me send a cheque over to the tax office'? Is that really what this bill is relying on—the honesty and good grace of foreign owners of vacant properties in admitting the property is vacant? Clearly, the minister has not given any thought to these things. We have severe concerns about the limitations on this. It's all very well to put in place a rule, but if you have no mechanism to enforce the rule—if you have not mechanism for determining whether a property is vacant or not—it is, as I said, fiddling while Rome burns. It's trying to be seen to be doing something when the place is falling down around you. At the moment, the number of first home buyers is down at a level we haven't seen since the Gillard years. Building approvals are down. The number of new homes being built is down. Rents are up and vacancy rates at record lows. You'd think that with all those concerns occurring in the community now we would be debating a bill in this House that does something fair dinkum. Instead, we increase taxes on foreign owners of property—provided that they voluntarily declare that the property is vacant and that they voluntarily send the cheque through to the tax office. You've got to be kidding me! As the former housing minister, I must say that it's a compliment that the only thing this minister can talk about is coalition policies—coalition policies that we worked hard to think up, deliver and implement in our last term of government and that they, to their credit, haven't wound back. But shouldn't the housing minister, in 18 months, have done something herself? The only policy, or two policies, helping Australians get into a first home at the moment from the federal government include our highly successful Home Guarantee Scheme that provides first-home buyers with the opportunity to buy a home with a deposit of as little as five per cent. That was a policy we took to the 2019 election. I implemented it within six months as housing minister. It commenced on 1 January 2020. It's now helping one in three first-home buyers. Prior to that we established the First Home Super Saver Scheme, which the Labor Party said they would abolish, but—good on them—they haven't abolished it. But they're the only two schemes that are helping first-home buyers now, and in 18 months the housing minister has talked about her kumbaya meetings with state and territory ministers around the country that have delivered nothing. The one thing they did take to the election supposedly for first-home buyers was their shared equity scheme, their Help to Buy Scheme. We saw that bill being introduced very recently. By the way, the scheme was supposed to have started on 1 January last year, 2023. It's already more than 12 months late. So, again, what on Earth is the housing minister doing? What is the housing minister doing, at a time when there is literally a housing crisis and the focus is on trying to encourage foreign owners of property to voluntarily send a cheque into the ATO, with no mechanism or ability to enforce the rules in front of us? It's an absolute scandal, what we see from the government. The sooner they move the housing minister on, the better. The sooner they bring in somebody who's got some energy and ability to do something, the better, because on every single metric it's a big fail from this minister and this government—a huge fail. And who pays the price? Well, Australians are paying the price. Whether you're somebody who is struggling with rent increases or whether you're try to save for that first home, it's a fail from the government. Sure, there's some help, with the coalition's highly successful Home Guarantee Scheme, but there's no help from this government. If you are working in the residential construction industry you're seeing a massive slowdown. We saw the former opposition criticising the HomeBuilder program, a hugely successful program that kept the half a million Australians who work in the residential construction industry busy. Well, those homes have now come through the system. So, under that coalition program that ensured that homes were being built, those homes have come through the pipeline, and we've seen nothing from this government in the past 18 months. So, now we see the number of new homes down every single month. In about a week and a half, the HIA and the MBA will outline their building activity assessments for the year ahead. I hate to say it to the Minister for Housing, but my understanding of those projections is that the numbers look even worse; the numbers are even worse for the year ahead. Again, sadly, it's confirming that if 2023 was a housing crisis, 2024 is just going to get worse. And while that's happening, the minister sits on her hands, bereft of any ideas. She has no idea of what to do, no idea of what to stand up for. The first thing she should do is head into the next cabinet meeting and tell the government to finally get their migration program under some control, because you cannot keep bringing hundreds of thousands of migrants to this country with absolutely no idea of where they're going to live! Whether it's students, whether it's workers, whether it's other visa classes: you have to know where those people are going to live because we do have an obligation to the young Australians in this country who want a home of their own, whether it's a home that they're renting or a home that they're buying themselves. At the moment, if you're in a major capital city, whether you're in Sydney or Melbourne or Brisbane, it is tough. What we have not seen, really in my living memory, is how difficult it is in rural and regional Australia as well. The inability to get a house in regional Australia is not only choking economic growth, choking the ability of so many of our industries to expand, but, pleasingly, there's an increasing number of Australians who are choosing, when they graduate school, to stay in the rural or regional area that they grew up in because there were more economic opportunities created by the former coalition government for those people. But if there's nowhere for them to live, it causes huge social dislocation in those communities. So what is the plan of the government? The plan is to put a media release out there saying, 'We're going to build 1.2 million homes,' with absolutely no idea of how that's going to happen. And then what happens? A few months later, as we now see, independent experts—whether it's the HIA, the NBA or others—say, 'You're going to fall hundreds of thousands of homes short.' That commitment is not worth the media release it was written on. You have to actually have a plan to do something. And if the centrepiece of that plan is asking foreign owners of property to voluntarily pay a vacancy charge, good luck. Good luck! We will support the bill, even though we see no prospect of this having any impact. I hope that the minister heeds our advice, that you can't increase a tax without any mechanism of enforcing it. You can't increase a tax, or indeed impose a tax, without any mechanism of actually determining whether a property is vacant or not, that doesn't necessarily rely on the good-heartedness of the owner voluntarily admitting that their property is vacant. You have to enforce it. There is an opportunity for the minister to move amendments to her own bill, to try to fix it, to try to make this work. And if the minister does come in and try to amend this shell of a bill, to try and actually give the tax office, or any other agency, an ability to actually enforce these taxes, we will support it wholeheartedly. But at the moment, I can see no way in which this makes any impact whatsoever. It certainly won't make any impact when we have an out-of-control migration program that is in no way linked to the number of houses being built in this country. You cannot run record migration when you have record low numbers of houses being built. You don't need to be a Rhodes scholar or a genius—even our Prime Minister can work that out. You can't have record migration when you are building record low numbers of homes. In conclusion, this minister is fiddling while Rome burns. We encourage her to come up with some ideas. Don't just rely on the coalition, who put in place a number of wonderful programs, do something. Do something! You have the great honour of being a minister. Do something! Come up with some ideas, or, if you don't have any ideas yourself, go and speak to some people who you might be able to steal some ideas from. Thus far, Mr Deputy Speaker, we've seen nothing from this minister, and the sooner she's moved on, the better. Debate adjourned. Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024 12

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024

Second Reading 12 13:16 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024, the Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024 and the Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024, otherwise known as the additional appropriation bills for 2023-24. These bills provide appropriations for the continued services of the government and decisions taken since the 2023-24 budget, as announced in May 2023. In total, these bills appropriate approximately $11 billion for the remainder of 2023-24, the majority of which, approximately $8.7 billion, is for the ordinary annual services of government. There is also provision of $2.5 billion for the Defence portfolio, $1.8 billion for the Social Services portfolio and $1.3 billion for the Health and Aged Care portfolio. I'll say from the outset that the opposition will support this legislation of the government. We will ensure that the services of government continue to operate by facilitating the passage of these bills through parliament. However, these additional appropriation bills and the proceeding appropriation bills that were handed down with the 2023-24 budget and, more recently, MYEFO demonstrate yet again that the government has no effective plan to deal with the cost-of-living crisis that is bearing down on Australian households right across this great country and has eventuated in the 18 months that this government has been in office. It is very simple. When you ask Australians whether they are worse off than 18 months ago, you hear a nearly universal chant of 'Yes, we are worse off.' The truth is that Labor can't manage the economy. We have seen the evidence plain and clear in the streets of suburbs right across this nation and the regional towns right across this country. We see the evidence of it every day. I make a point of going into Foodbanks right across the country—indeed, I've been to a Foodbank in the electorate of the member here at the table, the member for Fairfax—and I see, coming into those Foodbanks, people who only 18 months ago would never have dreamed that it would be necessary. After just 18 months we've seen a collapse in Australians' standard of living—their 'real disposable income' economists call it. Their standard of living has been nearly irreparably damaged by 18 months of Labor. Heaven help us, there's more to go, and no doubt there'll be more pain as a result. I'll put this in perspective, Mr Deputy Speaker. An 8.6 per cent reduction in the real disposable income of the average Australian is far, far worse for those with a mortgage—$20,000 or more. In the outer suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne we are seeing very big mortgages, because that's what it takes to buy a home, and the impacts there are astronomical. We are seeing it in my own electorate. That pain is like nothing anybody expected. For the average Australian, it is $8,000 less purchasing power in their income. One way or another, after tax, they have to go and find another $8,000 just to stay still, to not go backwards. These are extraordinary circumstances they are facing. Ultimately, there are three different parts to what's caused this. We have seen 9.6 per cent increase in prices in that 18 months. We've gone for a long period with low inflation in this country, but it's taken a Labor government to achieve that kind of extraordinary outcome. We are back to the levels we saw in the seventies and eighties—9.6 per cent in just 18 months. At the same time, we have seen 12 increases in interest rates. That's been devastating for those with a mortgage. As I say, they have been the hardest hit group of any Australians and they are the ones who we see really suffering in our electorates right across Australia. There is a third piece to this which was not expected but is now very, very clear, which is a dramatic increase in personal income taxes being paid; indeed, a 27 per cent increase in personal income taxes being paid, and those opposite have been trying to say that's because of rapid population growth. It's true there has been rapid population growth but that accounts for little over three per cent of the total, so it's not that. Then they say it's extra hours, that Australians are working extra hours. But they are not working 27 per cent extra hours, so it's not that. It turns out that their tax rates have just gone up. Why have their tax rates gone up? The great thief in the night that every Labor government loves is this thing called bracket creep. We can call a lot of things 'creeps', but the bracket creep we have seen over the last 18 months has been very real. This is the thief in the night. It works its ugly magic where inflation rages under a Labor government who can't get under control, inflation that is as bad or worse than any other major advanced country in the world. The Economist has described it as the most persistent inflation of any major advanced country in the world. As our Reserve Bank governor has told us, it's homegrown. That inflation works on tax rates. It pushes people up without increasing their purchasing power; indeed, often they will see a reduction in their purchasing power. We've seen real wages growth go backwards in the last 18 months by a substantial margin. But still, they see more of the nominal income going up into higher tax brackets and the result of that is their average tax rate goes up. For a Treasurer who believes that you fund the government budget by taking more from the household budget, this is a matter from heaven; he absolutely loves it. But I've got to tell you, the Australian public don't, and that 27 per cent increase in income taxes, you only have to ask people—and I often ask this question—'Did you have a look at your tax return in the last six months of last year? Have a talk to your accountant about it.' Time and time again, people say, 'Yes, in past years under the Liberal government, I got money back but not this time.' That 27 per cent increase in personal income taxes is a very real pain being felt by Australians, but someone has to fund this Treasurer's and this Labor government's spending habit, and a spending habit it is. Coming back the core substance of the bill, this bill helps Labor to spend an extra $209 billion since they came into government—that is, over $20,000 for every Australian household. They can't help themselves. They will always do it and it is simply making it harder for the Reserve Bank, which wants to get inflation under control. It's why the Reserve Bank believes inflation will be above band until the end of 2025, meaning interest rates and mortgage repayments will be higher for longer. As the chief economist of CEDA said just recently, the government and the RBA are not on the same page. Well, they're sure not! The Reserve Bank want to get interest rates and inflation down, but this government is somewhere else. It's way after the 2023-24 budget. Economists call the government's fiscal strategy 'stimulatory'—that was the UBS chief economist—and 'unambiguously expansionary'. That was the Betashares chief economist, David Bassanese. I think that's indicative of the sorts of comments we heard about the $209 billion from taxpayers that this Labor Treasurer has chosen to spend, funded heavily by the household budgets of every single Australian household. Under this Labor government's failed economic management, households have suffered, as I've said. Food has gone up more than nine per cent, housing 12 per cent, electricity 23 per cent and gas 29 per cent. And, of course, there have been 12 interest rate increases, as I mentioned. Sadly, we're seeing rents experience the highest increases since 2009. We have a housing crisis on our hands, and we heard a wonderful speech just a moment ago from my colleague the member for Deakin about the huge challenges faced in our housing market. This is what happens when you prioritise delivering for your union mates, and you have no idea about growing the economy or what drives productivity, prosperity, wealth and competitiveness. Whilst of course the opposition will be supporting this bill, we will continue to hold this government to account for its failure to manage the budget, manage the economy and curb the cost-of-living crisis that this government has overseen. Debate adjourned. Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2024 13

Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2024

Second Reading 13 13:27 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon I want to begin the discussion on this increase to passenger movement charge under the Passenger Movement Charge Amendment Bill 2024 with a quote from the 2017 shadow tourism minister: The increase in the Passenger Movement Charge has real consequences tourism and will have jobs impacts in the tourism industry, which employs a million Australians, is Australia's largest service export and has been nominated as one of Australia's five super growth sectors … Who do you think was the 2017 shadow tourism minister? Do you think it might have been the Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs? No! Do you think it might have been the Treasurer? Do you think it might have been the Minister for Defence? No, it was the Prime Minister! We've seen this type of behaviour from the Prime Minister before. He says a lot of things before elections and is very empathetic. 'I'm not going to do this,' and, 'We wouldn't do this and we wouldn't do that,' and then what does he do? He gets into power, and he does the complete opposite. What is remarkable is that he does so without even blushing or thinking, 'I might be seen as a bit of a hypocrite,' or, 'Someone might allude to me as being a bit like Pinocchio,' or anything like that. He quite shamelessly does it. Mr Ted O'Brien 138932 Does he bring up his earlier comments? Does he refer to them? Mr TEHAN 210911 No; we haven't heard the Prime Minister speak on this, but I'm sure when he does he will of course refer to his 2017 quote on the passenger movement charge. What we are seeing once again from this government—and this is the serious part of this discussion—is their failure to manage their economy, and what that leads to is them having to increase taxes and charges across the board. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour. STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS 14 STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS Braddon Electorate: Albanese Government 14 13:30 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon No industry in Braddon is safe from Labor's economic wrecking ball. Labor's mantra appears to be, 'Delay, delay, delay,' and it's shameful. My people have had enough. On Tasmania's west coast, Minister Plibersek refuses to provide certainty for the salmon farming in Macquarie Harbour, impacting entire communities across the west coast and threatening the lifeblood of the salmon industry in its entirety. Just an hour up the road, at the Rosebery mine owned by MMG, they've been waiting 18 months for Minister Plibersek to make a decision on their critical tailings dam at South Marionoak, which will secure the livelihoods of 550 workers. That's 550 families and even more downstream contractors. Keep heading north and you will reach Dismal Swamp, where during the election campaign they were promised $12.5 million. They're still waiting, with that just being kicked down the road—delay, delay, delay. Adjacent to that is Robbins Island, where proponents of the 550-megawatt wind farm are still waiting on Minister Plibersek's approval, with her federal department unwilling to engage meaningfully. You can then head to Burnie. We've been waiting for nearly two years for the Attorney-General to be part of a solution that insures north-west coasters aren't forced to travel all the way to Launceston to attend family court matters. This is his jurisdiction. On the other side of town, Minister Catherine King has ripped away $16 million which was promised for the Massy-Greene Drive project, which is a critical truck route outside Burnie. (Time expired) Taxation 14 13:31 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean From 1 July this year, the Albanese Labor government will deliver a tax cut for every taxpayer in the electorate of Bean. A primary school teacher in Bean working at Arawang Primary School in Weston Creek and earning $85,000 will get a tax cut of $1,800; an electrician working on construction sites in Woden and earning $110,000 a year will get a tax cut of more than $2,400; a software engineer working at the Department of Social Services in Greenway—there is lots of work there—and earning more than $140,000 will get a cut of $3,700; and nurses working at Goodwin Village Farrer, who received increases in their pay in last year's budget, will now get an additional $1,500 tax cut. No matter who you are, this Albanese Labor government will make sure you keep more of what you earn. We understand that family budgets are under pressure right now, and we are taking that pressure off family budgets. It's our No. 1 priority. Under Labor, more people are working and more people are earning more, and under our plan more people will keep more of what they earn. I stand here proud to be part of the government that is delivering real cost-of-living relief to families in my community of Bean but also in every community right across the country. Bowman Electorate: Redland City Council Australia Day Awards 14 13:33 Mr PIKE 300120 Bowman Each year Redland City Council recognises outstanding residents and community organisations within the Redlands through the annual Australia Day awards. It is a terrific night to acknowledge the members of our community who make an outstanding contribution and give freely of their time, knowledge and expertise to promote the welfare and wellbeing of the Redlands community. There is no more fitting time than Australia Day to celebrate all that brings us together as a community. This year our Redland Citizen of the Year was global star soprano Mirusia Louwerse. Our Senior Citizen of the Year was the Cage Youth Foundation's Linda Grieve, although I've told her she's way too young to be considered a senior citizen. Also highly commended as a senior citizen was Marie Dalton. The Young Citizen of the Year was youth mental health advocate Cody Schaeffer. The Local Hero Award went to Gavin Kugler of the Point Lookout Surf Life Saving Club. The Local Hero Award Highly Commended category went to Paul Suess and Julie Bennell, who've been highly involved in our local Scouting movement. The Community Organisation Award went to STAR Community Services. The Cultural Award winner was Jonathon Welch AM, and the Sports Award was taken out by adaptive water skier Scott Wintle. The environment and sustainability category was taken out by Kevin Hughes, and the Reconciliation Award went to Michael Hume, who's led a mountain of work in Indigenous engagement in local schools. I want to congratulate all the remarkable groups and individuals who've left an indelible mark on the Redlands community. Albanese Government 14 13:34 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa A helping hand: it's the Australian way, and it's most definitely the Labor way. I'm proud to be a member of a government that recognises that almost all of us, at some stage, need that helping hand, and in difficult times, with the cost of living being what it is, a helping hand is needed now more than ever. That's why I welcome the Treasurer's recently announced tax cuts, which will see every Australian worker better off from 1 July. That's why I welcome the $500-a-year assistance that helps age pensioners, like Mollie in Macquarie Fields, pay their electricity bills, something that Mollie has told me has been so helpful. That's why I welcome our boosting of Medicare to get bulk-billing rates up and the changes in prescriptions and medicines to make them cheaper. The list goes on and on: rent assistance, child care, JobSeeker payments. It all adds up and it all helps. The government wants people to earn more and keep more of what they earn. Under our government there are more people in jobs, they're earning more and, with the tax plan that comes in on 1 July, they'll keep more of what they earn. Good governments ensure that people are better off, and that's what is happening here. That is what the Albanese government was elected to do, and that's what the Albanese government is doing. Cybercrime: Discrimination, Middle East 15 13:35 Ms DANIEL 008CH Goldstein As a tolerant society, we are rightly proud of our multiculturalism, but conflict in the Middle East is testing us. Since October, we've seen an increase in racial vilification and, with it, antisemitism. This has culminated in the publication of the private details of hundreds of Jewish Australians who were using an online chat platform to communicate. Since the abhorrent terrorist attacks of 7 October, my main priority has been the safety and security of Goldstein's Jewish community. Several of those affected by this case of doxxing are my constituents. Most are creatives who are now being subjected to cancel culture in the extreme. I'm pleased the government has listened to those of us who've called for the criminalising of doxxing and has pledged to move fast. I've also suggested to the government that a special envoy for antisemitism is warranted. I will add here that I'm deeply concerned at the Israeli government's decision to launch attacks in Rafah, where more than one million Palestinians have sought refuge since the Israeli government warned them to leave northern Gaza. As the Australian government has said, Israel must listen to its friends, and it must listen to the international community. Workplace Relations 15 13:37 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter Because of this government, workers are benefiting from better pay, improved job security and stronger workplace rights. We have closed the loopholes. We are a party of the workers. We are getting wages moving, and we have had two straight quarters of real wages growth at four per cent, the highest growth in 15 years. Miners working for labour hire companies in the Hunter have been ripped off and paid less for years. Last year we fixed that and put an end to the labour hire rort. The second part of the closing the loopholes legislation will provide casuals with a proper pathway to convert to more secure, permanent work. It will also introduce world-leading minimum standards for gig economy workers. This bill also ensures a safe, sustainable and viable trucking industry. It will put a stop to unpaid overtime for workers through a right to disconnect from unreasonable contact. I know those opposite don't support any of this. They voted against it, just like they voted against the miners in my electorate for the first part of this legislation. Peter Dutton wants Australians to work longer and get paid less. I remember when we were talking about this and going through this whole legislation in this House. Not once did someone on the opposition side talk about a worker's rights. All they did was talk about bosses and everyone else. Not once did they talk about a worker. That's why we're here—to make sure workers get what they need and what they deserve. Taxation 15 13:38 Dr RYAN 297660 Kooyong Guess who paid more tax on their income last year—you or your gas company? There's a good chance it was you. Most fossil fuel multinationals in Australia paid zero company tax between 2014 and 2020. We have the balance completely wrong when the Australian government collects more money from HECS debts than it does from taxing the income of gas multinationals. Australia is very good at taxing small businesses and families but it's terrible at taxing multinational fossil fuel companies. Almost every other country with large coal and gas industries does that better than us. It's not rocket science. It's not even brain surgery. We need to strengthen the petroleum resource rent tax, and we need to take that money and put it into targeted relief to help everyday Australians get through this cost-of-living crisis. We need to take that money and put it into cheaper power, more housing, child care and aged care. The major parties listen more to fossil fuel companies than they do to everyday Australians. They care more about the next election than the next generation. It's time to reset politics in this country so that it's about people and not about political parties. It's about making sure that we tax multinational corporations properly. That's one of the first steps to getting there. Cost of Living 16 13:40 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser Everyone agrees that there is a need to help households with the cost of living. For working households there are two key aspects to that: what they earn and how much tax they pay. What's remarkable is that, despite all of the words and rhetoric and bluster of those opposite, they resist helping families on both sides of that equation. First is the fact that they seem to be all over the shop in relation to whether or not they support millions of low-and middle-income households getting a better deal on taxes. What do they really think? Their deputy leader was crystal clear that she wants to roll them back. Most of the rest of them in speech after speech after speech suggest they might be willing to be dragged kicking and screaming to vote for them but only after trying on a whole range of amendments and after indicating they don't actually support them. All Australian taxpayers should have no confidence that those opposite are voting for them for any other reason than political expediency. Second is their position when it comes to workers' pay and conditions, and here things are clearer unfortunately. Those opposite have never seen a law or a policy that improves workers' pay and conditions that they don't automatically and viscerally oppose. They like catchphrases like flexibility, productivity, nimbleness and disruption, but, strangely, when those opposite have their hands on the levers, these never turn into dollars in the pay cheque. Every time a low- or middle-income earner gets a pay rise or a bit more in their tax return, they should know that it was despite the concerted efforts of those opposite. Durack Electorate: Women 16 13:41 Ms PRICE 249308 Durack As International Women's Day approaches, I'm delighted to be shining a light on the remarkable accomplishments of the Durack female leaders that I've had the pleasure of working with and collaborating with as the federal member for Durack. In the next few weeks on my social media, I'll be sharing captivating narratives, valuable insights and also the unique challenges faced by over a dozen extraordinary women who are residing in our remote, regional and rural communities. Today I just want to highlight two of these fabulous women in Durack. The first one is Ms Karen Chappel AM. She's the president of the Shire of Morawa and of the Western Australian Local Government Association. When we asked Karen what words of inspiration she could share with women in regional, rural and remote Western Australia, she said: Always be proud of being a girl from the country, we are known to be resilient and practical. Do not let the tyranny of distance become a barrier to participation in whatever passion or cause you believe in. The other wonderful woman that I want to highlight is Lara Sadowski. She is a great friend of mine, and so is Karen. She is a gun real estate agent from Geraldton. When we asked her who her role models were that inspired her, she said: 'My mother, who passed away at a young age from illness. She was selfless and gave everything to her family. Coming from an Eastern European background, you were taught to work hard for what you wanted and to give to others before you gave to yourself. Eastern Europeans are a gritty, intense and supernaturally sturdy people. Communism, wars and winters— (Time expired) Workplace Relations 16 13:43 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence Yesterday I am sure many of us here witnessed the final arc in the Nemesis saga. By that I mean the nemesis to hardworking Australians. Ever since the closing the loopholes bill was introduced into this place, we have seen those opposite do everything in their power to get in the way of workers being able to earn more and keep more, especially when they have to work more. We saw pathetic displays from those opposite, starting with complaints about having to read the bill, let alone consider it. But we always knew whose side they were on, and it wasn't going to be on the side of workers. Those opposite, throughout this entire debate, have seemed to be the largest supporters amongst the parliament of a right to disconnect—but only when it concerns themselves. They will defend their God-given right to disconnect from reality and to disconnect from any semblance of rational thought when it comes to debate on industrial relations. They are disconnected from everyday Australians, and that has been as clear as day, combating the nemesis opposite in their intent to disconnect the working people of this country from working conditions. This government will always have the backs of Australian workers, working to ensure that they will be earning more and keeping more. Cost of Living 16 13:44 Mr CALDWELL 306489 Fadden I rise today to talk about the cost-of-living crisis that is gripping Australian households, and, unfortunately, it's happened at the feet of this terrible Labor government. People out there are doing it tough. We've just come off what is normally the happy Christmas season, but people were paying more for the Christmas ham and more for the kids toys to put under the tree, and, of course, they got the electricity bill that rolled in, and it's up again. Family groceries are just a painful experience now because the prices have escalated so dramatically at the hands of this Labor government. We've seen $8,000 less in net disposable income for each household. It's making life tough. So what do they propose? In 138 days time, you might get an extra $15. That's great. Australians will take that, because, quite frankly, they need it right now. But they know that this Labor government will come after that money again and again, because when Labor governments run out of money they will come after yours. We've heard promises made before the election. We've now seen promises broken. What will the next lie lead to? The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Fadden, that is unparliamentary behaviour. Mr Watts 193430 Do you withdraw? Mr CALDWELL 306489 I am happy to withdraw. My apologies. The reality for Australians is this: the bitterness of that untruth will remain long after the sugar hit— (Time expired) Taxation 17 13:46 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Today, we witnessed the absurdity of an opposition leader who vocally opposes Labor's tax cuts but plans to vote for them. What a cruel joke! On 1 July this year, every Australian taxpayer will get a tax cut, and for the average Australian worker this will mean $1,500 more in their pocket. It's $1,500 dollars they would not have received under the former coalition government's plan. These tax cuts are aimed squarely at people who work hard to make a difference for themselves and their families. Our Labor government wants Australians to earn more and to keep more of what they earn. The opposition leader wants something different. He wants people to work longer for less. He wants hardworking Australians on call, 24 hours a day. He opposes higher wages. He votes against help with your power bill. He votes against cheaper medicines. He votes against affordable housing and penalty rates. His stance wavers like a reed in the wind. While he reluctantly says he is supporting Labor's tax cuts, he argues against them endlessly. Australia's deserve better. They deserve a leader who gets the job done in the best interests of all Australians. These tax cuts are the right decision at the right time. They put more money in the pockets of hardworking Australians without impacting inflation. In closing, Labor is making the right decisions for the right reasons, and that's why the opposition leader is voting for them. Defence Procurement 17 13:47 Mr STEVENS 176304 Sturt It's a frightening time in my home state of South Australia if you're in the defence sector right now. We're seeing daily reports of imminent, dramatic changes to the continuous shipbuilding program, which we believed the government would honour and which they said before the last election that they would honour. Now we have reports of a dramatic scale back of the Hunter frigate program. Indeed, we even have the South Australian Premier conceding or perhaps agreeing that the nine frigates won't be built now. I've never seen thousands of jobs for so many years thrown out the window with such a gesture. Now, we seem to have a situation where the uncertainty is dramatically draining confidence for anyone in the defence sector. There are question marks over vehicle contracts in Army. As someone who has Rheinmetall, one of the major prime contractors, based in my electorate, it is a frightening situation that so much uncertainty could lead to an enormous loss of jobs in South Australia. The surface vessel review was given to the government last year. They've had it for months. It needs to be released, and we need to have a very clear commitment for continuous shipbuilding in South Australia. Anything short of that will be a dramatic broken promise to the people of my electorate. Workplace Relations 17 13:49 Ms MILLER-FROST 296272 Boothby The Liberal and National parties want to end the weekend. They don't want Australians to have downtime. They don't want workers to be able to spend time uninterrupted with their families. They want workers to be on call all the time 24/7—no switching off the phone, no turning off the email—and, of course, all unpaid. They want unpaid overtime any time, with no notice and no agreement, 24/7. Those opposite say, 'You're on call—no weekend for you!' They want Australians to work longer and earn less. We know that wage suppression was a deliberate part of the economic strategy of those opposite—if you can call nine deficits in a row an economic strategy! They voted against every measure to get wages moving. They were horrified by our plan to give tax relief to low- and middle-income workers. They don't care that 84 per cent of Australian taxpayers will be better off. The deputy opposition leader said that they would roll back the tax cuts. They want Australians to work more, earn less and keep less of it. For the permanent casual workers, those opposite don't want them to have job security. They don't want them to be able to get a mortgage or make plans for their future. They want to keep casual workers insecure, hungry and dependent. The Liberal and National parties stand for lower wages, higher taxes, no weekends and insecure work. The Albanese government stands for higher wages, being paid for the hours you work, lower taxes and a secure future. Housing, Dunkley By-Election 18 13:50 Mr SUKKAR 242515 Deakin The Prime Minister is a gold medallist for broken promises, and today we see another broken promise. The government's 1.2 million homes promise has already been trashed. It's in tatters. TheAustralian today reports that the government will miss that target by hundreds of thousands, and it's no surprise to Australians out there who know, with fewer homes being built, fewer homes being approved, first home buyers at record low levels and rents skyrocketing, that this government's got absolutely no idea when it comes to housing. It was very good to recently visit our wonderful candidate in Dunkley, Nathan Conroy, who understands the failures of this government on housing, who understands the pressure that the residents of Dunkley are under, whether it's higher rents or their inability to get into their own home. In that regard, I want to thank those of Beechwood Homes who hosted Nathan and me—Matthew Mepstead, David Rossiter and Susan Daly—who took us through some of the challenges that the residential construction industry is dealing with and the piles of additional regulations being placed on them by this government. Rest assured, the people of Dunkley have a champion in Nathan Conroy, who will fight for the first home buyers and for the people struggling with crippling rent increases, because we know that not only will this government miss every single target but they've got no idea and no plan when it comes— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The member for Bendigo. Workplace Relations, Taxation 18 13:52 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Things are getting better for Australian workers. On this side of the House, we are committed to making sure that they get to earn more and keep more of what they earn. This week, the second part of the closing loopholes IR reform has gone through. That means we are closing the loopholes to make sure that Australian workers are earning more and that they get a fair day's pay for a fair day's work. What we're also debating before the House is the stage 3 changes to the tax laws, which will see all Australian workers get a tax cut. That means in my electorate, a regional electorate, all our taxpayers will get a tax cut. Eighty-four per cent of workers will get a better tax cut under this reform—roughly about $14,000 extra in their pocket. That's what they will get from this government. That's what happens when you have a government that is committed to all workers receiving a fair outcome for what they do—all workers, not just the people who earn the higher incomes but the people who care for their parents, the people who look after their children and the people who cut their grass and clean their houses. That is what a responsible government that cares for all workers does, and that is what I'm so proud to do and why I stand here today—making sure that people earn more and keep more of what they earn. Albanese Government 18 13:53 Mr TAYLOR 231027 Hume One of the great disappointments for people across Australia and across the world, indeed, is the loss of trust of leaders, whether it's in business, media or government, but this Prime Minister, this government and this Treasurer are making a bad situation worse. We have a prime minister and treasurer who have broken too many promises and whose words mean absolutely nothing. The Prime Minister and his Treasurer promised over 100 times that they wouldn't change the stage 3 tax cuts—an election promise that they voted for. They didn't tell the truth. They misled Australians in a calculated way, because they were working on it for months. We know this because Treasury said so. It's extraordinary to think that they could say one thing to the Australian public while planning and working on the exact opposite. But, then again, it shouldn't come as a surprise, because this is the government—we've got the responsible minister here—that promised that power bills would come down by $275 and that there'd be cheaper mortgages. There is no sign of that; they've gone up 12 times. Real disposable incomes have collapsed by $8,000 under this Treasurer. Australians deserve better than them. Honourable members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Enough! I just remind the House I have no problem hearing, so stop yelling at me. Taxation, Workplace Relations 19 13:55 Ms LAWRENCE 299150 Hasluck Eleven million Australians deserve the bigger tax cut that our government has designed and is legislating. These tax cuts will give every taxpayer in my electorate of Hasluck some much-needed relief during a particularly difficult time for family and household budgets. But oh my! Haven't the opposition equivocated whether our tax cuts are appropriate? But ultimately it appears that it is something that they agree is a good idea. But what they give with one hand they take with the other, because apparently the right not to be unreasonably harassed outside of your work hours is a bridge way too far for the Liberal Party. Our tax cuts to middle Australia are making them very uncomfortable, so they're reaching for the age-old Liberal crutch of denigrating workers and union bashing: 'Here's your tax cut, but it'll cost you your weekend.' This position is cartoonishly evil. It would be funny if it weren't that the opposition sincerely believes it. The right to disconnect is a right that many employees have already negotiated into their enterprise agreements. However, there are many millions of workers without such an agreement who do not have that right, and you cannot assert a right that you do not have. That is why we are making it a right. So to the workers: not only are you going to be benefiting under the Albanese Labor government with some major tax cuts and have more money in your pocket, but shortly you'll also be empowered to strike your own work-life balance. Victoria: Bushfires 19 13:56 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon ():  Today in Victoria, we've got our worst bushfire day of the summer. As a matter of fact, it's a code red. We're already seeing fires in the Grampians and in and around Beaufort. Can I just take the time—and I'm sure all the House joins me—to commend all those firefighters who are out there on the ground at this very moment fighting those fires. The Grampians saw terrible fires in 2004 and 2016. Hopefully, with the air approach and the ground approach, they'll be able to bring those fires under control very quickly. There is also a fire which is burning near Beaufort, near Stockyard Hill. This is an area that I drive by every time I'm going between my home and the parliament. There is a CFA volunteer fire station at Cross Roads. You see those local farmers and volunteers preparing for a day like today. I know that they will be out there on the ground fighting this fire, putting their lives at risk to protect the local communities. Our thoughts are with all those who are on the ground doing that work today. May they be able to bring all those fires under control and protect the local communities. Once again, to everyone who's out on the ground at this moment: our thoughts are with you. Taxation 19 13:58 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong Over the past few weeks here in parliament, we've all had front-row seats to the Liberals' tax cut circus, and without a doubt the ringmaster of that circus has been the shadow Treasurer. His acrobatics on Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts will put him up there even against the most seasoned trapeze artist or contortionist. We've seen the shadow Treasurer out there arguing against Labor's tax cuts and then revealing that he'll support them. When asked whether he wanted more support for low-income earners, he said no. And, of course, we've had their support acts let slip their desire to roll back our cost-of-living tax cuts. In the final act, the 'wheel of electoral death', one morning the shadow Treasurer said Labor's tax cuts were Marxism, only to reveal by the end of the day that he would vote for them—truly an inspired performance. Let's just contrast the Liberal circus with Labor's plan for middle Australia. Labor wants to deliver a tax cut for every Australian, not just some. Labor's plan will ensure that 84 per cent of Australians will be better off. In Bennelong, a software engineer on $140,000 will get a tax cut that is $500 more than under the Morrison plan. Labor's tax cuts are the right economic policy made fairer and better for the right reasons, because on this side of the House we want Australians to earn more and keep more of what they earn. The SPEAKER 53517 In accordance with standing order 43, the time for members' statements has concluded. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 19 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Immigration Detention 19 13:59 Mr DUTTON 00AKI Dickson My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. The Albanese government has released 149 hardcore criminals from immigration detention, including seven murderers, 37 sex offenders and 72 other violent offenders, putting Australians at risk. At a time when Australian families are living through a cost-of-living crisis and struggling to make ends meet, can the minister confirm the hardcore criminals he has released, including rapists and murderers, have now received over $3 million in free accommodation and welfare payments? Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Minister for Home Affairs will cease interjecting. So will the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The SPEAKER 53517 The Minister for Home Affairs, I just said, will cease interjecting. That means cease interjecting. 14:00 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question, although I remind him and all members that it was a decision of the High Court that required this government—and indeed any government—to release the detainees in question. I remind him as well that the arrangements in place for support for people who are released from immigration detention are the same as they were when he was the minister responsible. First Nations Australians 20 14:01 Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Lingiari My question is— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Lingiari will begin her question again. She shall be heard in silence. Ms SCRYMGOUR F2S Thank you, Speaker. My question is to the Minister for Indigenous Australians. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to create jobs in remote communities and build a better future for Indigenous Australians? 14:01 Ms BURNEY 8GH Barton I thank the member for Lingiari, who knows very well the importance of this announcement by the Prime Minister today. We've today announced the new Remote Jobs and Economic Development Program to also recognise the 16th anniversary of Closing the Gap. This part of our response means that communities will have a say over their futures and the economic development that they believe they need. It is a $707 million investment and the first step in our commitment to replace the failed Community Development Program. The new program will be grounded in self-determination. Communities will decide what jobs are created across various sectors like aged care, child care, hospitality, tourism, horticulture and town maintenance. A $185 million community jobs and business fund will be set up for local and community owned businesses to apply for money for equipment and capital. For too long, people in remote communities have missed out on the dignity and the benefits of work. When I visit remote communities, which is often, fixing the mess left by the Liberals and the failed Community Development Program is absolutely the No. 1 issue raised with me. This is about creating a better future for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians in remote communities. I am so pleased—and the member for Grey should listen to this one—that in the remote South Australian community of Koonibba we are seeing people sign up to the trial of our new program. Peter Hurrell was employed yesterday. He will be learning new skills and putting those skills to work in his community. The Productivity Commission's first review on progress on the terms of the national agreement has demonstrated that all governments need to do better. I am so, so pleased the Prime Minister made this announcement today. It will be a recognition of the peaks and also a recognition of the importance of jobs and economic development in Aboriginal remote communities. Immigration Detention 20 14:05 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. On 13 November, in between releasing criminals, the minister told the House that he had 'issued visas to impacted individuals with appropriate conditions to ensure that community safety can be upheld'. Last night the Department of Home Affairs revealed it had always advised these conditions would be unenforceable. Asked why, they said, 'I think you would have to ask the ministers for an explanation.' Can the minister please explain— A government member: Time! Mr TEHAN 210911 why he misled the House? The SPEAKER 53517 The Leader of the House. Mr Burke DYW Notwithstanding the questionable nature of the start of the question, by trying to turn it into a speech, the speaking time elapsed before a question had been asked. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! I'll hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Fletcher L6B It was perfectly clear what the question was. You allow plenty of latitude on the speaking times from the government, so it's appropriate that there be a bipartisan approach on this. The SPEAKER 53517 Yes, I'll deal with this matter. I'm going to allow the question. I did hear the question, but this is the position going forward: I don't want anyone calling out 'time' again—on both sides. It happens all the time. There's got to be some discretion allowed by the chair. If people want the exact timing enforced, it will happen, but I'm going to remind all opposition questioners, and the crossbench and ministers as well, to respect the time limits. 14:05 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the shadow minister for the question. I remind him, too, that the release of detainees was required by the decision of the High Court in November. It was required. In response to that, we took a range of steps to ensure the Australian community was kept safe, including immediately setting up Operation AEGIS. We saw the coordination of the ABF, the AFP, and state and territory law enforcement authorities. We've put in place stringent visa conditions, and we moved to change the law to criminalise breaches of those visa conditions as part of the four layers of protection we now have in place: stringent visa conditions, electronic monitoring and curfews, community safety orders— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The minister will pause. The minister was talking about the conditions and about the question. I'm going to listen to the member for Wannon. Mr Tehan 210911 I only want to advise that those conditions— The SPEAKER 53517 Resume your seat. The member for Wannon, as is common in this House, is a serial offender when it comes to coming to the dispatch box and just speaking. He's been here for a very long time. This is the last time— The SPEAKER 53517 Fourteen years, I'm advised by the member for Riverina. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Everyone's helping today! I'm going to remind the member for Wannon: this is the last time. You simply can't get to the dispatch box and start speaking. You will get the call, just state the point of order. Silence is going to continue so I can hear the minister. Mr GILES 243609 As I was saying, we've put in place four layers of protection. We've also set up the Community Protection Board to advise government on the appropriate measures to manage this cohort that we were required to release into the community. We've also done something that the former government did not do, and that is that we've made a real investment in immigration compliance—a quarter of billion dollars. This is in sharp contrast to decisions taken by the Leader of the Opposition, who halved the compliance function. Taxation 21 14:09 Ms TEMPLEMAN 181810 Macquarie My question is to the Prime Minister. How will the Albanese Labor government's new tax cuts take pressure off Australians, and what obstacles has the government overcome in delivering this relief? 14:09 Mr ALBANESE R36 Grayndler I thank the member for Macquarie for her question. She knows that, on 1 July, as a result of Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts, every Australian taxpayer will get a tax cut. Not just some—all 13.6 million of them will, because we support the aspirations of all Australians, not just some. Our tax cuts will ensure that 84 per cent of Australians get a bigger tax cut than they were going to get before our intervention. Our No. 1 priority is easing cost of living without adding to inflation. That's the key—getting costs down for families, getting wages up for workers and getting the budget, of course, onto a stronger foundation, with the first budget surplus in 15 years delivered by this Treasurer. Whereas we want people to earn more and keep more of what they earn, those opposite want people to work longer for less. That is the great divide in Australian politics that we're seeing played out. Our tax cuts come on the top of other measures: cheaper medicines, affordable housing, energy bill relief, higher wages, cheaper child care and historic investment in Medicare. That is the action that we are taking. Those opposite have said 'no' to every action this government has taken on cost of living. They've even stopped asking questions in this place. They never talk about cost of living. When we announced our tax cuts, their gut reaction was to oppose them, and then they said they'd roll that back, because it just didn't cross their minds to look after people who are earning under $45,000 a year and to give those people a tax cut. It didn't cross their minds that maybe average workers deserve double the tax cut, which is what we're delivering for them. We were reminded of what their focus has been last night in the third episode of Nemesis, where Huey and Dewey down there featured quite prominently! And here's Louie! Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The Prime Minister will pause. The member for Riverina and the member for Gippsland! Order! Honestly, the members for Riverina and Gippsland land will cease interjecting so I can hear from the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Fletcher L6B I have a point of order on relevance. The question was commendably tightly drafted, and it did not go anywhere near the territory that once again the Prime Minister seems to be wanting to divert into. The SPEAKER 53517 There was no reference to television shows in the question, but the Prime Minister was asked about obstacles. I'm just going to ask him to make sure his answer is relevant and to include any material relating to obstacles. Mr ALBANESE R36 The obstacle is an opposition that are obsessed by each other. The Manager of Opposition Business just moved a point of order saying he didn't want to talk about it. None of them were shy last night! They were queueing up at the ABC studios. They were there in Harris Street, day after day, week after week. It was a sit-in to get their noggins on the TV as part of that show, to demonstrate how much they hated each other. The Australian people didn't rate a mention last night. There was no discussion of policy and no discussion of people— (Time expired) DISTINGUISHED VISITORS 22 DISTINGUISHED VISITORS Country Mayors Association of NSW 22 14:13 The SPEAKER 53517 Before I call the member for North Sydney, I have just a couple of quick acknowledgements. I'd like to inform the House that present in the gallery is Councillor Jamie Chaffey, the Mayor of Gunnedah and President of the Country Mayors Association of NSW, as a guest of the member for Parkes and the New South Wales Parliament member for Coogee, Marjorie O'Neill. Welcome to you all. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 22 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Taxation: Corporate Profits 22 14:14 Ms TINK 300124 North Sydney My question is to the Treasurer. Last financial year, Origin Energy reported a net profit of more than a billion dollars, listing elevated commodity prices as a contributing factor. In the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, will the government consider taxing windfall profits to fund cost-of-living measures in the May budget? 14:14 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thanks to the member for North Sydney for her question. As the home affairs minister rightly points out: at last someone over in that direction who cares about the cost of living. In the most recent budget one of the key initiatives was to get a bigger return sooner from the offshore gas industry when it comes to taxation. That is partly because, as the honourable member rightly identifies in her question, we need to make sure we can fund the quite substantial cost-of-living relief that we have provided in our first two budgets and that we are providing when it comes to our cost-of-living cuts for middle Australia. Obviously in future budgets we will look to provide additional cost-of-living help where that's affordable, responsible, necessary and effective. So, the principle that is in the question from the member for North Sydney is a principle that we have adopted, trying to raise a bit more tax out of the industry that she identifies in order to fund some of our priorities. Because of that, because of our responsible economic management—whether it's sensible changes to resource taxation, whether it's our changes to multinational tax, whether it's our changes to high-balance superannuation accounts or whether it's our efforts on compliance in a whole range of areas—in addition to the $50 billion of savings that we found in two budgets compared with the zero dollars in savings in their last budget, we have managed to get the budget in much better nick at the same time as we roll out that substantial cost-of-living help: strengthening Medicare, building a future made in Australia, and easing the pressure on families, pensioners and young people in communities like yours and indeed right around Australia. Taxation: Environmental Protection Workers 22 14:16 Mr JOSH WILSON 265970 Fremantle My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. How will Australian workers on the front line of environmental protection benefit from Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts? 14:17 Ms PLIBERSEK 83M Sydney Thanks to the member for Fremantle for his question. I know that he is one of the most committed and effective environmental enthusiasts we have in this place, and he is also absolutely all over the cost-of-living challenges that his voters face. In fact, he's got 85,000 constituents who will receive a tax cut from the Albanese Labor government's plan—an average of $1,761 more in their pockets each year because of the changes we are proposing, because we are all about making sure Australians earn more and keep more of what they earn, whereas those opposite are all about people working longer for less. I know that people who work on the front line of environmental protection don't do it for the money; they do it for love. They love nature. They want to protect and restore our natural environment. But looking at the sorts of challenges they face, when we came in, the Australian Institute of Marine Science—doing great science—was falling apart, facing 100 job losses, leaky roofs, laboratories that they couldn't use. We doubled their funding, and now we want to better look after their scientists. Say you've got a PhD going in there to do vital work on crown-of-thorns starfish or coral spawning—someone on $90,000 a year. They will keep $1,929 more of what they earn each year. Look at the Indigenous rangers who do such marvellous work around our country—Indigenous rangers at Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park or the Katit-Petermann Indigenous protected area—doing wonderful work, looking after the great desert skink in the mala enclosure, where they're breeding up malas to release back into the wild, and doing cultural burning to make sure those massive wildfires don't break out in Central Australia. An Indigenous ranger on $77,000 a year will keep $1,604 more of their pay every year because of the proposals we're making. That's not just important for that individual and their family. Those rangers, working in remote communities across Australia, are spending their pay in local businesses, creating work for others in their community. We are all about backing our scientists, backing our Indigenous rangers, backing our ecologists, because we will always stand for higher wages and for Australians keeping more of what they earn, as opposed to those opposite, who want to see Australians work longer for less. Immigration Detention 23 14:19 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. In Senate estimates last night it was confirmed that the minister, not the Community Protection Board, is the final decision-maker in relation to the conditions placed on the 149 former detainees. Given this, can the minister now tell the Australian people how many of the seven murderers and 37 sex offenders released into the community by the Albanese government are not wearing ankle bracelets? 14:20 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the Deputy Leader of the Opposition for her question. Yesterday in Senate estimates we saw a wide body of evidence which demonstrated that, in response to— Mr Violi 300147 You're out of your depth! The SPEAKER 53517 Just pause for a second. The member for Casey has been continuously interjecting all week. He's going to stop interjecting and start showing some respect to members in this House. The minister will be heard in silence. Mr GILES 243609 As I was saying, what we heard in Senate estimates was detail of the relentless effort that has been made by the government since November last year to maintain the safety of the Australian community. The critical part of that was, of course, the establishment of the community safety board, a body composed of eminent law enforcement and other professionals to provide us with expert advice on how to manage this cohort in the community. I've greatly valued their advice and, of course, the input of the ABF commissioner. Indeed, I've acted in accordance with their advice in every decision that I have made. Cost of Living 23 14:21 Mr PERRETT HVP Moreton My question is to the Treasurer. How do the Labor government's efforts to ease cost-of-living pressures fit into its broader economic strategy? What progress is being made and what obstacles are being overcome? 14:22 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I thank the wonderful member for Moreton for his question and for the way that he represents the southern suburbs of Brisbane and for helping to ensure that every Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut on 1 July. In his community, it means 85 per cent of taxpayers will get a bigger tax cut to help with the cost of living. This is a really important part of our broader economic strategy to ease the pressure on Australians, to invest in our people and their future and to get the budget in better nick. Our strategy has been endorsed just today, with two new releases. Standard and Poor's reaffirmed our AAA credit rating, praising our strong budget outcomes and endorsing the government's budget strategy. And the Westpac-Melbourne Institute Survey of Consumer Sentiment Index lifted to a 20-month high, and they say it's partly because of our tax plan for Middle Australia. There is no shortage of challenges in our economy and in the global economy, but we are making welcome and encouraging progress. When we came to office, real wages were going backwards by 3.4 per cent, quarterly inflation was more than three times what it is now, there were huge deficits and there was nowhere near enough to show for a trillion dollars in Liberal debt. Now inflation is moderating, real wages have grown for two consecutive quarters, tax cuts will flow to every taxpayer from 1 July and we have delivered the first surplus in 15 years, which is helping us clean up the mess that we inherited from those opposite. We know it's not mission accomplished when it comes to inflation or the economy or the budget, and we know that people are still under the pump. That's why easing cost-of-living pressures is this government's highest priority. That's why these tax cuts come on the top of rent assistance, electricity bill relief, cheaper child care, cheaper medicines and more, and it's why we are focused on boosting take-home pay. It's here, as the Prime Minister said, that the defining difference between those opposite and this government is the clearest. This Albanese Labor government is working to ensure that more Australians earn more and that they keep more of what they earn, whereas that opposition wants people to work longer and for less. It was clear last night in the documentary that ordinary working people didn't get a look-in for the best part of a decade of dysfunction, division and disarray. And now the leftovers from that period have abandoned Middle Australia in opposition, just like they abandoned them in government. They don't even pretend to care about the cost of living anymore. If they cared about the cost of living, they wouldn't have voted against electricity bill relief. If they cared about the cost of living, they wouldn't have said they would unwind our tax cuts for middle Australia. And if they cared about the cost of living, they would actually ask a question about it. Immigration Detention 24 14:25 Mr LLEW O'BRIEN 265991 Wide Bay My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Can the minister inform the House if the whereabouts of any of the 149 criminals is unknown? 14:25 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the member for Wide Bay for this question. One of the first things that we did in response to the High Court's decision was set up Operation AEGIS to ensure that our agencies and state and territory law enforcement agencies have the capacity to share information so that they can work across the country to keep the Australian community safe. I acknowledge his very distinguished service in law enforcement in the past. Through this— The SPEAKER 53517 The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. The minister is going to be heard in silence. I want to hear his answer. Mr GILES 243609 I've talked repeatedly about the four layers of protection that we have put in place to keep the community safe, and I can be very clear in saying that every individual is subject— The SPEAKER 53517 The minister will pause. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. Mr Dutton 00AKI The question was very tight. It asked the minister whether or not one of— Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! I'll hear from Leader of the Opposition on the point of order. Mr Dutton 00AKI On relevance, the minister was asked a very tight question: does he know where the 149 are or not? It's as simple as that. Can he answer the question? The SPEAKER 53517 The minister was asked a pretty short, tight question. I'm just going to make sure the answer that he's giving to the House contains the information, or as much information as he may be able to provide the House, regarding that matter and make sure he's directly relevant. Mr GILES 243609 As I was saying just a moment ago, each individual in the cohort is subject to at least one of the four layers of protection. That means that each one of them is being continuously monitored and, of course, as I said just earlier, we've criminalised breaches of our strict visa conditions, so if anyone thinks they can get away with those, we will find you, and everyone will face the full force of the law. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left will cease interjecting. When the House comes order, I'll hear from the member for Higgins. Taxation 24 14:28 Dr ANANDA-RAJAH 290544 Higgins My question is to the Minister for Education. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to support workers in the education system and to tackle disruption in Australian schools, and what has been the response? 14:28 Mr CLARE HWL Blaxland I thank the terrific member for Higgins for her question. Last week I told the House about what the tax cuts mean for teachers. For a teacher on, say, 95 grand a year, it'll mean a tax cut of more than 2,000 bucks. But, of course, it's not just teachers who work in our schools. A teachers aid on 65 grand a year will get a tax cut of more than 1,300 bucks, a school cleaner on 40 grand a year will get a tax cut of more than 600 bucks and a school bus driver on 70 grand a year will get a tax cut of more than 1,400 bucks. Every taxpayer gets a tax cut; that's the point. That's why Australians support it, and that's why, over the last few weeks, the opposition have been behaving like some kind of beginner's Bikram yoga class—all hot and sweaty and desperately trying to contort themselves into a position that we know they really don't want to be in. They hate it, but they're voting for it. Why? Because they know that Australians want Albo's tax cuts. Not only that—they know Australians deserve Albo's tax cuts, and that's what they're going to get on 1 July. The SPEAKER 53517 I'll just ask the minister to refer to all members by their correct titles. Mr CLARE HWL Of course I will, Mr Speaker. They know that Australians want and deserve the Albanese government's tax cuts. I'm also asked about disruption in our schools. There are lots of reasons for that, but one of them is vaping. This is what a principal said in the Australian on the weekend: They're— that is, students are— fixated on getting their next hit, are very disruptive and distracted from learning. We see the behavioural effects of withdrawal, as kids disappear from the classroom so they can get nicotine hits. One in six kids in high school are vaping at the moment—one in six! This is a menace in our schools. No wonder parents are worried about it. Think about this: nine out of 10 vape stores are within walking distance of our schools. That's why the minister for health is about to bring legislation into this parliament to ban the sale of these vapes at these stores, and I want to thank the minister for health for his leadership in this area. Unbelievably, in that same article on the weekend, the opposition refused to back it. They refused to say that they would support this legislation. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Cowper will cease interjecting. Mr CLARE HWL On something so important, so serious, that affects our schools, our kids, parents and teachers, I can't believe that the opposition won't support this. Just like they've had a change of heart on tax, they need to back this ban too. (Time expired) Immigration Detention 25 14:31 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Does the government know the whereabouts of the seven murderers and 37 sex offenders? 14:31 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the member who just asked the question. As I said, although there was a bit of noise a minute ago, all individuals in the cohort—all of those who were required to be released by reason of the court decision—are being continuously monitored. Workplace Relations 25 14:32 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair My question is to the Minster for Employment and Workplace Relations. What has been the response to the Albanese Labor government's reforms to help workers earn more and keep more of what they earn, including protecting workers from being expected to work when they're not being paid? 14:32 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I want to thank the member for Blair, both for his role in this parliament and for the question, and also as one of the members of this parliament who's committed to making sure that people earn more and keep more of what they earn, as opposed to being one of those members of this place who's committed to people working longer for less; they're in this room as well. And it's interesting that I hear that those opposite have made their first election commitment now in my portfolio, and the first commitment wasn't about whether there'd be new forms of bargaining. That didn't make them angry enough to make a commitment. The concepts of other legislation that we'd done about bargaining or the Fair Work Commission—none of that got them over the line. What really incensed them was that the principle of people working without being paid anything at all was being overwritten. This fundamental principle— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! The member for Groom will cease interjecting. Mr BURKE DYW that some people should be working parts of their weekend for nothing—that was enough to enliven them to have their first election commitment in this area. Let's just have a look at one of the sorts of workers in the member for Blair's electorate. Let's consider the impact of the right to disconnect on a constable, level 5, on $96,000 a year. On that, they're looking forward to a tax cut of $2,080. But, thanks to an article that's come out today from Ewin Hannan at the Australian, there's some information from what the Police Federation of Australia think about the commitment that the Leader of the Opposition has made. In their media release, they have specifically addressed the Leader of the Opposition, referring to his call and his first election commitment in industrial relations as being short-sighted, disrespectful and wrong. They go on to explain what happens when officers are sometimes called in the middle of the night for work that could easily wait until their next shift. That's why in many states but not yet all—what's the clause that they have in their enterprise agreement? It's a right-to-disconnect clause. The Police Federation of Australia is calling on all members of the federal opposition and those who are unsupportive on the crossbench to have a significant rethink of Mr Dutton's position on the right to disconnect, as this will have a significant negative impact for all first responders. In the words of the Police Federation of Australia: Mr Dutton should unwind this ill-conceived thought bubble. They said that their policy would be targeted. It's targeted against frontline workers, against pay rises, against job security and against people ever getting time away from work, where they know their time is their own. Petroleum Resource Rent Tax 26 14:35 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy Treasurer, don't Qatar and Australia export the same amount of gas? Is the Australia Institute correct in asserting Qatar earns $5,100 million dollars whilst Australia only earns $2,300 million? Further, doesn't our tax system result in DINKs getting, after tax, $75,000 per person whilst a three-child family gets only $15,000? Wouldn't a gas tax of $25,000 million and income splitting deliver on 1 June a tax return cheque of $25,000 to every Australian family and $2,000 to every pensioner? 14:36 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin Thank you to the member for Kennedy for his question. I want to acknowledge at the outset the enormous contribution that the North West Minerals Province and indeed the great state of Queensland makes to our national economy. I think honourable members would be aware that taxation on gas and the resources sector more broadly attracts a range of views. Typically, they are well motivated. Often they are well informed, though I think in this instance—I say respectfully to the member for Kennedy—that might be part of the tax paid by the industry but not the whole tax paid by the industry. All of these things—and the member for North Sydney's question and your question, member for Kennedy—I think show that all of these issues around resource taxation are contested. What is not contested is that, if our legislation passes the House, we will collect more tax from offshore gas because of the changes in the budget to the PRRT. We will increase tax receipts from offshore LNG by $2.4 billion over the forward estimates. This will help us fund important priorities like strengthening Medicare or providing cost-of-living relief to people in his community or indeed around Australia. Without those changes, we would collect less revenue, and we would be less able to fund cost-of-living relief for people. I know that the member for Kennedy has a view around income-splitting. Our view is that we have found more effective ways to provide relief to the types of families that the member for Kennedy is talking about—for example, our tax changes. Every one of the 71,000 taxpayers in Kennedy will get a tax cut because of our changes; 86 per cent of them will get a bigger tax cut than they would have otherwise. In fact, the average income earner in Kennedy will have their tax cut multiplied more than three times by what we are proposing in our changes. Because of those policies, whether they be for medicines, tax, support payments, rent assistance or others, we are providing more support to the people of Kennedy. Thirty-nine thousand people will benefit from cheaper medicines in Kennedy alone. Almost 5,000 are benefiting from income support increases. Four-and-a-half thousand renters get our boost to rent assistance just in Kennedy. And, as I said, 86 per cent of taxpayers in his community would be paying more tax were it not for our changes. I say to the member for Kennedy: I'm grateful for the question, and I know there are contested views about tax on resources. What isn't contested is that we are doing something about that, and that is helping to fund important cost-of-living relief not just in his community but in every community represented in this place. Aged Care 26 14:39 Mr BURNS 278522 Macnamara My question is to the Minister for Aged Care and Sport. How is the Albanese Labor government supporting aged-care workers and making sure they can keep more of their hard-earned wages? 14:39 Ms WELLS 264121 Lilley I thank the member for Macnamara for his question and would like to acknowledge his advocacy for the aged-care workers in his electorate, particularly the wonderful workers we visited at Emmy Monash Aged Care in Melbourne. The Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety was a damning report on the quality of aged care in this country and it spanned five very long volumes. For the benefit of those opposite—that dynamic cast of characters who have regaled us all in Nemesis and who, across 4.5 hours of ruminating, never once passed the subject of the aged-care crisis on their watch—I will distil that report down to just one word, and that word is 'neglect'. The Albanese government, however, understands that the best investment we can make to lift the standard of aged care in Australia is to make an investment in aged-care workers. That's why we delivered an $11.3 billion increase to the minimum award for 250,000 aged-care workers, and that's why we've provided fee-free TAFE so people who are passionate about caring for older people can turn that passion into a career and receive a certificate III in individual support for free, saving up to $5,600. That's why we are delivering a tax cut for every single aged-care worker. I recently went and met with residents and workers at the MiCare Avondrust Lodge in Carrum Downs, which is in the electorate of Dunkley. I went there alongside Jodie Belyea, and we spoke to an aged-care worker named Dawn. Dawn is a breast cancer survivor and has worked in aged care for seven years. Dawn loves her job because she gets to care for older people, including her mother-in-law, who lives in the home that she works at. Good on you, Dawn! But love doesn't pay Dawn's bills, and we know that aged-care workers like Dawn are facing cost-of-living pressures. That is why we are delivering a tax cut for Dawn and for every single one of her colleagues. But, while we are delivering dollars for aged-care workers, the coalition are only delivering yet more lip service. Mr Fletcher L6B A point of order on relevance. A commendably tightly drafted question was asked which allowed no territory at all for the minister to go where she is now going. The SPEAKER 53517 Yes; the Manager of Opposition Business is correct. The question was about aged-care support. The minister is entitled to compare and contrast, but she's not entitled to do an analysis of the opposition's policies. I'll give her the call and make sure she remains relevant. Ms WELLS 264121 I'm talking about the support for aged-care workers. I've just talked about how we are supporting aged-care workers. I would now make the point that across the summer one of the members of the coalition toured aged-care facilities and delivered certificates to aged-care workers. I ask: did those certificates have in fine print that the coalition refused to support a pay rise for the aged-care workers receiving certificates? Did those certificates state that if the coalition was still in government some of those registered nurses would be $10,000 a year worse off than what they are now under the Albanese Labor government? Did the certificates state that the coalition would not support the tax cut for aged-care workers? Then, maybe, they crossed that out and said that actually maybe they would support tax cuts for aged-care workers, and then maybe they said, 'No, we'll go back and we won't support the tax cuts for aged-care workers— (Time expired) Immigration Detention 27 14:43 Ms McKENZIE 124514 Flinders My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Can the minister confirm all seven murderers and 37 sex offenders have been and remain continuously monitored? 14:43 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin As I think I've said on a couple of occasions, every individual required to be released by reason of the High Court decision is subject to at least one of four layers of protection, including the stringent visa conditions which apply to everyone in the cohort. Defence Personnel 27 14:44 Ms ROBERTS 157125 My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to deliver for defence personnel and veterans, including through Labor's cost-of-living tax cut plan? 14:44 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt I thank the member for Pearce for her question. She has over 3,000 defence personnel and veterans in her electorate. I know she has close relationships with the three RSL sub-branches in her electorate, including being the patron of the Yanchep Two Rocks RSL Sub-Branch. In her electorate—because I know she cares about cost-of-living pressures for her veterans, her defence personnel and all of those living in her electorate—73 per cent of taxpayers are going to be better off. Just like all Australian taxpayers, the ADF members of our country deserve to keep more of what they earn. We care about that on this side of the House. Almost 87 per cent of Australian Defence Force members will be getting a higher tax cut under the Albanese better tax cut plan that we are putting forward from 1 July. A maritime warfare officer in their first year of warfare training at HMAS Watson will get a tax cut of over $2,000. An Air Force sergeant—an avionics technician maintaining Super Hornets at RAAF Base Amberley, in the member for Blair's electorate—will get a tax cut of $2,417. That's because we care about the cost-of-living pressures that are being borne by Australians, the cost-of-living pressures that are being borne by our Defence Force personnel. This builds on the improvements that we are making for housing support for serving personnel, access to health care and education support so that our defence people and families are better off. We're also delivering for our serving personnel, veterans and families through DVA. The interim report of the Royal Commission into Defence and Veteran Suicide highlighted the 42,000-claim backlog at DVA, saying this was having a seriously detrimental impact on people's mental health. Well, as at 31 January this year, the total number of claims yet to be allocated to a delegate has fallen to less than 3,700. Thanks to the Albanese government's increasing resources for DVA, including fulfilling our commitment of 500 additional staff to process those claims, all new initial liability and incap claims will now be allocated within two weeks, and we'll be clearing the backlog for permanent impairment by the end of the month. This is beating the time limit that was set for us by the royal commission. This is because we are committed to improving the lives of Defence Force personnel, veterans and families, and part of that is delivering a better tax cut plan that will benefit serving personnel and all taxpaying veterans, because we on this side of the House care about cost-of-living pressure, unlike those on the other side of the House, who are just jumping one way and the other, not being clear with the Australian people, trying to roll back their position and being unclear about how they're going to support Defence Force members, taxpaying veterans and all Australians who are suffering from cost-of-living pressure and will benefit from our better tax plan. Financial Scams 28 14:47 Mr BROADBENT MT4 Monash My question is to the Treasurer. Although it's annoying, there's a reason why banks are asking customers why they want to withdraw cash and what for. A bank manager told me recently that a significant number of customers who came in to withdraw cash were being scammed. Recently in my circle a couple, a sensible couple, were scammed of $100,000, and another friend of mine was scammed of $40,000. Treasurer, what more can we do to protect the Australian people from this evil? 14:48 Dr CHALMERS 37998 Rankin I thank the member for Monash for his question and I commend him for his focus on what is a really important issue. I acknowledge his efforts on behalf of his constituents for some time now. This is a big focus for the government as well. For that, I want to be upfront and say that I take absolutely no credit for the government's focus on scams. That's because the work of the Assistant Treasurer in this regard has been absolutely terrific. He has worked tirelessly to tackle and take on this evil in our community and in our economy in a really impressive way. He has done that in collaboration with the banks, key institutions and other ministers, including the Minister for Communications and others. So I pay tribute to him and to his work. It's a huge issue, and I thank the hundreds of people who come to his community forums around Australia and all the people who come through our doors in our electorate offices and come up to us at mobile offices too, who are evidence enough of that. In 2022, Australians lost over $3 billion to the absolute grubs who try and scam money out of people—often the most vulnerable people but, as the member identifies in his question, not just people that we would traditionally consider to be vulnerable. That's why we're taking decisive action and it's why we have an ambitious agenda here, led, as I said, by the Assistant Treasurer. In last year's budget, we invested $86.5 million in fighting scams and online fraud; $17.6 million for ASIC to bust fake investment websites; $58 million for the ACCC to establish the world-leading National Anti-Scam Centre; and over $10 million for ACMA to establish and enforce an SMS centre ID registry to stop scam texts—and again I acknowledge the work of Minister Rowland. It's still a big problem, but the crackdown on scams is already showing some signs of success. In the six months since the Anti-Scams Centre was created, losses to scams reduced by 29 per cent compared with the same period in 2022. Call disruption technology saved potential victims from major losses, with one consumer saving 300 grand. By last week, ASIC had taken down 4,220 investment scams websites and there are hundreds more in the works. Early data this year shows overall scam losses are around 40 per cent lower than the same period in 2023. The Assistant Treasurer and the Minister for Communications are also working with telcos and digital platforms to see what else can be done in that regard. This is a very big focus of the government. There has been some absolutely terrific work done by the Assistant Treasurer. It's a very important and welcomed question from the member for Monash, and I thank him for it. Health 28 14:51 Mr ZAPPIA HWB Makin My question is to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Minister, why are Labor's tax cuts good for healthcare workers and their patients? How will the tax cuts build on the Albanese government's actions to make medicines cheaper? How is the government ensuring that Australians are able to access affordable medicines after a decade of cuts and neglect? 14:51 Mr BUTLER HWK Hindmarsh I think the member for Makin, a 10-time national powerlifting champion who represented his country at three separate world championships. And he's represented his community in the north and north-eastern suburbs of Adelaide for almost five decades as a councillor and then a mayor and now a member in this place. There are 78,000 taxpayers in the electorate of Makin. On 1 July, Labor will deliver every single one of them a tax cut to help with the cost of living. Many of them work in health, including at the terrific Modbury Hospital, which celebrated its 50th anniversary only recently. A third-year nurse working at Modbury will receive a tax cut on 1 July of $1,520, more than double what they would have received under the plans of those opposite. The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Barker is warned. Mr BUTLER HWK A cleaner at Modbury will receive a tax cut of more than $1,000, or four times what they would have received under the plan from those opposite—hardworking health and hospital workers earning more money and keeping more of what they own. These bigger, better tax cuts for middle Australia build on all of the other cost-of-living measures that this government has been rolling out, like cheaper medicines. Only last year, in one year, Australian patients saved $250 million from our cheaper medicines policies, and they will save even more this year. In a couple of weeks, around 100 more medicines will be able to be supplied for 60 days at the cost of just a single script, saving patients time as well as much more money. The Treasurer's responsible budget management also means that we've been able to list dozens and dozens of new cutting-edge medicines on the PBS. This month, I'm delighted to say that we've listed a new immunotherapy drug, Opdualag, for advanced melanoma. As this year's terrific Australians of the Year, Georgina Long and Richard Scolyer, reminded us, Australia tragically has its own national cancer—melanoma. There are 20,000 Australians diagnosed every single year and, even though survival rates have improved dramatically in recent times, still on every single day about four Australians lose their lives. Opdualag will give new hope to around 1,000 Australian patients every year whose melanoma either is unable to reach surgically removed or has become a metastatic. It would usually cost $315,000 for a course of treatment. From this month, though, it will just cost PBS prices. Cheaper medicines aren't just good for the hip pocket in a cost-of-living crisis; they also mean that middle Australia can access the world's best treatment at affordable prices—all part of our commitment to strengthen Medicare but also to help with the cost of living. Immigration Detention 29 14:54 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. In Senate estimates last night it was revealed that on 8 August, 14 September and 12 October last year, the general counsel of the Department of Home Affairs met staff in the minister's office to discuss the legal prospects and policy options that led to the release of 149 hardened criminals into the community. It was further revealed the minister did not attend any of these meetings. Why? 14:55 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the shadow minister for his question. I say once more it was a decision of the High Court that required the release of the individuals. As minister and as a member of this government, my No. 1 priority has been doing everything I can to keep the community safe and that continues to be my commitment. Taxation 29 14:55 Mr GEORGANAS DZY Adelaide My question as to the Minister for Skills and Training. How are Labor tax cuts supporting more apprentice tradies to complete their training while keeping more of what they earn? Why is this support for apprentices so important? 14:56 Mr O'CONNOR 00AN3 Gorton I thank the member for Adelaide for his question and for his strong advocacy for apprentices and the VET sector in his electorate and beyond. It was great to be with the member for Adelaide just before Christmas as we visited a great company in Adelaide, Bianco construction, where we spoke with apprentices. I think we spoke to the apprentice boilermaker, Isaiah, and to the apprentice carpenter, Bailey. They were so proud of the fact that they were undertaking training in an area of demand. They love their trades. But they were honest, too, and said that it was very difficult to make ends meet on apprenticeship wages. It's not easy and we know that. For that reason, we have to do better as a country to provide support for these apprentices. At the moment, our apprenticeship completion numbers over the last 10 years have been as low as 55 per cent, so I will have more to say about what we will do to improve completion rates of apprentices but we have to do more. It's also fair to say that this government understands the cost-of-living pressures across our economy for everyone, including apprentices. For that reason, this government wants to provide support for all Australians and that's why we are giving every taxpayer a tax cut from 1 July; that's what we're doing. Of course, that means we can provide support for apprentices who are on relatively low wages to ensure we do the right thing by them. Like any good policy, most good policy serves more than one aim. It realises more than one ambition, so not only will we provide cost-of-living relief for apprentices, we will also increase the likelihood of them staying connected to their training so they can actually finish their apprenticeship and supply the skills to our economy which are much needed. For that reason, I very much appreciate the fact that we are going to support these apprentices. I would just like to inform the House what these apprentices will be receiving from 1 July. A first-year apprentice 'sparkie' will be getting over $500 from 1 July under the Albanese Labor government's tax plans. A third-year adult apprentice plumber will be receiving in excess of $800 under our tax cut plans. A second-year hairdresser apprentice will receive $500, so too a first-year carpenter. A third-year VET trained early childhood educator will be receiving $804 from 1 July and so too will the adult apprentice working in aged care. Also, a junior boilermaking apprentice will be in receipt of $654. This is very important support for apprentices in this country; it's critical. If it was left of those opposite, they would not be receiving a cent under those opposite. Immigration Detention 30 14:59 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. The Albanese government has released 149 criminals from immigration detention, including seven murderers and 37 sex offenders. So far, 18 of these criminals have been charged by state and territory police for new offences. Evidence in estimates has revealed the government has not even applied for a single community safety order to protect the public from these criminals. Minister, how is this possible? 14:59 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the shadow minister for his question and say, once again, it was the decision of the High Court that required the release of the individuals that are the subject of his question. I remind him again that our top priority has been, and remains, keeping Australians safe through four layers of protection as well as the wider framework, which of course includes the community safety order and preventative detention regime. I'm pleased that members opposite joined us in putting in place this regime before Christmas, and I thank them for their support in the House. I remind them too that our scheme is modelled, as proposed by members opposite, on their own high-risk terrorist offender scheme. And I remind them, including the Leader of the Opposition, who was the minister at the time, that it took more than three years for the first continuing detention order application to be lodged under the high-risk terrorist offender scheme. We are preparing applications and we are making sure, as the evidence of Ms Sharpe made clear in the Senate estimates yesterday, that we will do so properly. And as Senator Paterson pointed out, back in 2021, there is: … a very high legal threshold to be met for a Court to agree to the ongoing detention of an offender who continues to pose an unacceptable risk. It's a serious piece of work to be done. That is why we are taking it seriously, to ensure applications are made properly. And it isn't just Senator Paterson who made this point. Indeed, this morning a prominent member of the opposition said this: Well, of course we are all aware there is a higher threshold, and we knew that before we put the legislation through the parliament before Christmas. That was the member for Wannon. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The member for Wright will cease interjecting. The SPEAKER 53517 Order. The member for Groom will also cease interjecting or be warned. Taxation 30 15:02 Dr MULINO 132880 Fraser My question is to the Minister for Social Services. How will the Albanese Labor government 's proposed tax cuts help working families and complement existing measures in the social services portfolio that are providing cost-of-living relief? 15:02 Ms RISHWORTH HWA Kingston I thank the member for Fraser for that question. I appreciate his advocacy for families in Fraser, and right across the country. The Albanese government's No. 1 priority is supporting Australians faced with cost-of-living pressures. We know many working families are feeling the pressure, and we, as a government, are working hard to deliver meaningful relief. On 1 July, Labor will deliver a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer. These tax cuts will make a real difference to the 13.6 million Australians right up and down the income ladder. This is good news for Australian workers and families, allowing them to keep more of what they earn. Take a dual-income family: one parent works full-time earning $80,000 and the other works part-time earning $45,000. Under Labor's plan this family will get a tax cut of $2,483. That is more than twice the amount they would have received under the Morrison plan. More money in their pocket from Labor's tax cuts— The SPEAKER 53517 The member for Groom is warned. Ms RISHWORTH HWA comes alongside the extra support we are giving to families through our historic investment in paid parental leave, the biggest since Labor introduced it in 2011. Since last year, we've given more families access to the payment, introducing a more generous $350,000 family income limit and made it much easier for both parents to share care. And from July this year we're expanding the scheme by an extra six weeks, reaching six months in 2026. When fully rolled out, that is an extra $5,000 more in the family budget. We've also targeted cost-of-living relief to families on the lowest incomes. We've listed the base rate for working age and student payments, and we've expanded the eligibility of the single parent payment until their youngest child turns 14, up from eight. The latest data shows that this has already helped 77,000 single parents. At the same time, we are delivering the biggest boost to rent assistance in more than 30 years, which is also helping to moderate rent rises. For families, this complements the government's extra support in delivering electricity bill relief, cheaper child care, cheaper medicines and investments in bulk-billing. When it comes to tackling the cost of living, we on the side of the House take it seriously. It is clear that those opposite have given up. They have given up when it comes to cost of living. They have abandoned the territory. They never wanted the tax cuts for middle- and low-income Australians. They never wanted electricity relief. They never wanted income support. We will get on with the job. (Time expired). Immigration Detention 31 15:05 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. The Albanese government has released 149 hard-core criminals from immigration detention, including seven murderers and 37 sex offenders. On 18 November last year, the minister stated: Ankle bracelets—electronic monitoring, I should say to be clear, is a mandatory requirement under the Bill that has come into effect today. That is across everyone in the affected cohort. Can the minister explain why 36 of the 149 hard-core criminal he released are not wearing their mandatory ankle bracelets? 15:06 Mr GILES 243609 Scullin I thank the member for Wannon for the question. I presume he is familiar with the provisions of the bill which he voted for in the House, which required a decision to be made in respect of whether to impose the condition. That decision, as I have outlined in the House, is informed now by the advice of trusted professionals, including people like Graham Aston, former Victorian police commissioner and AFP deputy commissioner, in terms of managing community safety and determining whether or not a decision is made. Immigration Detention 31 15:07 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce My question is to the Minister for Home Affairs. The Richardson review found extensive misuse of public money in offshore processing under the last government. How is it possible that public money was misused in this way and who was responsible? 15:07 Ms O'NEIL 140590 Hotham One of the things that makes the member for Bruce's public service so distinctive is his continued focus on integrity, and I really want to thank him for his question. Yesterday, our government released a landmark report. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER 53517 Order! Members on my left! The minister will be given the courtesy of being heard in silence. Ms 140590 Yesterday our government released a landmark report by Dennis Richardson AC, who I think everyone in this chamber would agree is a person of absolutely unimpeachable integrity. Our government commissioned that report in the face of genuine questions being raised about the integrity of contracts in our offshore processing system. Mr Richardson was asked to review the contracts and examine whether any wrongdoing had occurred. The findings in this report are genuinely extraordinary. Mr Richardson found that, under the stewardship of the Leader of the Opposition, potentially hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars were funnelled into companies which were engaging in alleged criminal wrongdoing. Let me say that again: this is taxpayer dollars that your constituents and my constituents worked hard for, paid to the government in good faith, and under the Leader of the Opposition hundreds of millions of dollars of it were put towards companies which are suspected of drug smuggling, arms dealing, and money laundering. We know from Mr Richardson that massive profits were skimmed off these contracts. The member for Bruce asked me how this is possible. That and other questions about this incredible report are rightly directed to the Leader of the Opposition, because this happened on his watch. He set up and oversaw a system that facilitated great harms to Australians and to people around the world. The questions that the Leader of the Opposition needs to come forward and answer are: what did he know about this and when; and why does it appear that, after almost a decade in positions of leadership, he never asked a single question about any of it? It is a reprehensible dereliction of duty. What makes these questions so critical is what we see: an unbelievable gulf between who the Leader of the Opposition pretends to be and who he really is. This report exposes the Leader of the Opposition as an absolute fraud, someone who oversaw a system funnelling taxpayer dollars into drugs, guns and human trafficking, all while marketing himself as a tough guy on our borders. Of course, this joins the Parkinson review and the Nixon review, two reports that showed that, for all the tough talk, the Leader of the Opposition drove our migration system into a ditch and walked away, leaving me and the immigration minister to clean up his mess. Don't forget, he was voted the worst health minister in living history. He ran a defence department that oversaw years of endless delays. He clearly can't run a government department. I'm not sure why he thinks that he should run our country. Mr Albanese R36 I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper. COMMITTEES 32 COMMITTEES Appropriations and Administration Committee 32 Report 32 15:10 The SPEAKER 53517 On behalf of the Standing Committee on Appropriations and Administration, I present the committee's Report No. 28: additional estimates 2023-2024. Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e). DOCUMENTS 32 DOCUMENTS Presentation 32 15:11 Mr BURKE DYW Watson Documents are tabled in accordance with the list circulated to honourable members earlier today. Full details of the documents will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings. MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE 32 MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE Defence 32 15:11 The SPEAKER 53517 I have received a letter from the honourable member for Canning proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: This Government's mismanagement of Defence is making Australians less safe. I call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places— 15:11 Mr HASTIE 260805 Canning We are living in dangerous times and this government is weak on national security. It's true that weakness is provocative, and we can't afford to be weak as a country, which is why we have brought this MPI on today. We know that authoritarian powers are on the move. We saw China and Russia sign a no-limits partnership in February 2022, signalling deep cooperation. Since then we have seen Russia invade Ukraine, we have seen the PRC launch provocations in the Taiwan Strait, we saw Hamas attack Israel last October, and now we have Houthi rebels backed by Iran attacking global trade and shipping in the Red Sea. We are facing strategic disorder that we haven't seen in our lifetime, and it has consequences. Consider the cost of these attacks on shipping in the Red Sea. Before Christmas, the cost of moving a 40-foot shipping container from Europe to the Far East was less than $2,000. Today it's around 4½ thousand dollars. Now is the time for this government to act, because those costs will be passed on to Australian consumers. But this government is failing to secure Australia, because they are weak. It's very simple: they are weak. The Prime Minister is weak. The defence minister is weak. And when your political leadership signals weakness to the world, the risks go up. People stop taking you seriously. They push you around. They eat your lunch. They conduct sonar attacks on your divers. It's not good enough. The Australian people deserve more from this Albanese government. Weakness is manifest in their lack of commitment to defence spending. It's manifest in their cuts to capability. It's manifest in the chaos and dysfunction that we saw last week between the defence minister and his department. It's manifest in the deferral of tough decisions. We won't see a defence strategy until mid this year, and our uniformed personnel are taking note. We're seeing more and more defence members leave the Defence Force, and this government is failing to recruit new members into the Defence Force. Last year the Minister for Defence, to great fanfare, launched the Defence Strategic Review. He did it on the eve of Anzac Day—the old magician's trick—when the media was having a break and no-one was really watching. All the DSR revealed was that this government is not serious about protecting the Australian people. There was no new money for defence—no new money at all—and we've seen inflation eating into the purchasing power of every defence dollar in the budget. What happened here was that the Minister for Defence, at the ERC, lost to the foreign minister, Senator Penny Wong. He lost. He couldn't win a fight there. So the question is: if he can't win a fight at a cabinet table, how can he win the next war if called upon? It's a good question to ask. He is fundamentally weak. This lack of money has led to cuts to capability. We've seen the Army gutted. The new armoured vehicles have gone from an order of 450 to 129. We've seen the collapse of three brigades to one. We're moving all our Defence Force north, and of course that has consequences for retention and recruitment. All we saw from the DSR was pantomime and weakness, and it's not good enough. We now have questions now about the boxer program, a big deal landed with the German government, and it's just not good enough. In fact, just this week, we saw that the Australian National Audit Office has reviewed defence major projects and showed that, under the Albanese government, our most significant defence projects are running late by 37 years. This is just a consequence of weakness. We also see weakness manifest in the minister's deferrals and delays. He won't take a hard decision. Last week, Andrew Tillett in the Australian Financial Review revealed the pile of paperwork in the defence minister's in-tray—submissions waiting for action. In fact, we know that the Minister for Defence, even before these laws are passed, is exercising his right to disconnect from the very job that he's called upon to perform. We expect our diggers, sailors and airmen to have a bias for action. Well, the defence minister can start leading with a bias for action and taking some of these decisions. How about a defence strategy from this government? How about the surface fleet review being handed down? How about a decision on that going forward? It's not good enough. This government is weak, and we're seeing that in the deferral of tough decisions. We're also seeing weak leadership in the chaos and dysfunction at the heart of this defence ministry. Last week, we asked the question: why is the defence minister blaming his own department? It was in October of 2022 that the defence minister stood up and said: 'The buck stops with me. I take responsibility.' Mrs Marino HWP Joel said that too. Mr HASTIE 260805 Exactly. Yet we're hearing in the media—he's got senior officials briefing against him now—that he's having a bit of a dispute and he gave his senior generals and department officials a serve for their lack of excellence, and he got up last week and confirmed it. So the chaos and dysfunction we're seeing is really a consequence of a minister who's more concerned about lowering his handicap on the golf course than actually making the tough decisions. Mr Conroy 249127 Have another go at us, Andrew. Put it on a projector. Put it on an overhead. Mr HASTIE 260805 Let's not get started on you, Minister. I'm sparing you this, mate. Is that all you've got? I'll take the interjection. The real concern I have with this weak leadership that we're seeing from the Minister for Defence and particularly the man sitting opposite, the Minister for Defence Industry, who is very, very weak indeed—together they're both very weak—is the signal that sends to mums and dads out there who are sitting down with their kids around the kitchen table and being asked, 'What should I do with my career, Mum and Dad?' I bet you they're not saying, 'Join the Defence Force,' because what they would be seeing is a lack of spending and investment. They would be seeing— Mr Coleman 241067 Lack of leadership. Mr HASTIE 260805 a lack of leadership, dysfunction— Mrs Marino HWP Lack of ticker. Mr HASTIE 260805 a lack of ticker and all those things. There's long laundry list of failures. They've had less than two years in office, and there are consequences to this. We're not able to recruit young people. We saw, at Duntroon only a week or so ago, the announcement about the shortening of officer training from 18 months to 12 months as a way of trying to get people in. People are still separating at much too high a rate from Defence. It should be at about seven or eight per cent. Under this government, it's been at 11 per cent. We are losing people at a rate of 11 per cent per year. We have to grow the Defence Force to 80,000 people by 2040 because we need to crew our nuclear submarines and have people who are specialists in cyberwarfare. We need more pilots, sailors and soldiers, and we can't even meet 75 per cent of the target we set for ourselves every year. There's a lack of message. Defence should be about service, strength, opportunity and aspiration. I tell you: if you go across the road to ADFA or Duntroon and speak to the young Australians there who are serving their country, you will meet some of the finest young leaders in our country. They join because they want to serve, but they also see immense opportunity, and that should be at the heart of the message, and we're not seeing that. We're not seeing the defence minister stand up and sell a career in the Defence Force. So the question remains: how are we going to crew these vital capabilities? Weakness is also manifesting in a lack of action around AUKUS. Canning is about 35 minutes south of HMAS Stirling. We have a huge infrastructure deficit in WA. We're yet to see any works commence on that base. And by 2027 we're meant to be having US and UK nuclear submarines alongside, with about 2,000 personnel from the US and the UK. There are no houses, and the base itself hasn't even started its conversion from a conventional base to a nuclear base. There's still no decision on the dry dock at Henderson, which the previous coalition government committed $4.3 billion towards. And we still don't know what's happening with the OPVs or the Future Frigate Program. We are meant to be building confidence with our allies. The US and the UK are looking at us and thinking, 'We are handing the crown jewels of our nuclear program over to Australia.' It was a very important decision by the Morrison government that would set us up for success over generations going forward. It was handed on a platter to these people opposite. The lack of drive, the lack of initiative, the lack of leadership, the weakness of these people means that we are behind schedule. The Americans and the UK—but, more importantly, our strategic adversaries—are watching us. They're seeing that lack of commitment. They're seeing weakness. I'll come back to where I started. If you are weak, people will push you around. They will eat your lunch. Under this government the only signal we've been receiving from the Prime Minister and the defence minister is weakness. The Prime Minister, at APEC, could not even raise the fact that our divers underwater, serving with HMAS Kanimbla, had a Chinese destroyer launch a sonar pulse attack, causing barotraumas in their ears. The Prime Minister was briefed, and do you know what he did? What did he do at APEC in San Francisco? He said nothing. He took a weak position. It's a disgrace. And I tell you what: future generations will look back on this government and ask why you failed. (Time expired) 15:22 Mr CONROY 249127 Shortland Wasn't that an awful addition from the shadow minister for defence, the member for Canning? I was delighted when I saw this MPI. I've been begging for this MPI. Unfortunately, governments don't get to sett the MPI, so I had to wait for the shadow minister to bowl this up. It allows me to spend 10 minutes talking about how those opposite, the Liberal Party, are weak on national defence and have been ever since they were founded. So, I'm very delighted. Let's start with recent history. Lets start with modern history. Let's start with their record when they were in government. When the shadow minister was the assistant minister, for about five minutes, what did they actually achieve? Under the opposition leader, 28 major projects were 97 years late and $6½ billion over budget. What were some of these projects? There was the MRH-90 helicopter, a helicopter that they decided to buy against Defence advice. It can't fire weapons through the door when they're getting trips in and out. It had a tail rotor failure. It couldn't even have a cargo hook that worked properly. It was grounded on several occasions. And it was 7½ years late and then had to be retired. Then there was the battlefield airlift aircraft that can't even fly into battlefields—a tiny problem! There might have been a tip in the name. But it can't fly into battlefields. And they ordered patrol boats where they used faulty Chinese made aluminium that was prone to corrosion, and supply vessels where there is not even safe drinking water for the sailors. Just think about that. Imagine a defence minister, which the opposition leader was at the time, who couldn't even procure ships that had safe drinking water for sailors. The truth is that they couldn't manage a project to save their lives. And they like to talk big. They were great at announcements. Remember the Top Gun announcement at RAAF Williamtown? It was brilliant, but the truth is that they were big on promise but hopeless on delivery. They added $42 billion worth of spending commitments to the IIP but added zero new dollars—$42 billion of new promises, zero new money. And there were the $12 billion of cuts to the Defence budget since 2016. Here is the most dramatic one. They like to claim AUKUS. I saw Nemesis last night. It was literally the only thing the member for Cook can claim as an achievement in his life. But there is a tiny problem. They announced AUKUS. How much money did they allocate to the biggest national endeavour this country has ever undertaken? Three hundred billion? Two hundred billion? One hundred billion? Zero—not one cent added to the IIP for AUKUS, the biggest undertaking in this nation's history. That shows how deeply unserious they are about defending this nation. They had six coalition defence ministers in nine years. Goldfish lasted longer than coalition defence ministers. They had 23 ministers and assistant ministers in the portfolio in the nine years, including my two favourites: one lasted 51 days, and the second one, the excellent member for Riverina—I love him; he's doing a great job as the shadow minister for the Pacific—lasted 75 days. So, if we want to talk about weakness or about commitment to national security, those on the opposite side treated defence as a joke, and we saw the results. What about projects-of-concern ministerial summits, which are essential to getting projects back on track? Across their 9½ years in government, they had four ministerial summits to get projects back on track. I've had five in 18 months. They did four in 9½ long years. So the truth is that their record is incredibly weak, and they're also being incredibly mendacious and inconsistent in their application of big issues. They're criticising us all the time about our decision to focus our naval assets on the Indo-Pacific. The shadow minister put out a bizarre media release that talked about 'all feathers and no meat'. It must be a bizarre Canning saying. There's only one problem with that: he was an assistant minister in a government that said no to a similar request. He was part of a government that, as we found out today, in early April 2022 was requested to send a ship to the Red Sea as part of the Combined Maritime Forces. And what did they say? 'No, we need to focus on the Indo-Pacific.' I table the ABC News report that demonstrates the hypocrisy of those opposite when it comes to things like that. So this is a ridiculous debate put forward by those opposite because they have no credibility on defence. By contrast, we are increasing defence funding to 2.3 per cent of GDP; we've announced significant procurement reforms that the ANAO, in their recent Major projects report, said are making an impact; and we released the Defence strategic review, which charts the course forward. The truth is that only Labor can be trusted on defence. You just have to look at the record of those opposite throughout their entire existence as a political party to see how weak they are on national security. The terms of this MPI are about weakness, national security and who you can trust. The shadow minister talked about weakness ad infinitum. Let's talk about the weakness of those opposite. Let's talk about a political party started by Bob Menzies, a man who, in August 1939, blocked expansion of the Army. If you want to talk about weakness in national security, what did he do in September 1939? Ten days after Hitler invaded Poland, Bob Menzies sent a letter to our high commissioner in London, arguing that we should appease Adolf Hitler. He said they should carve up Europe, give parts of Africa to Italy and give parts of China to Japan. Here is a direct quote from this letter from Bob Menzies: … nobody really cares a damn about Poland … He wrote that 10 days after Hitler invaded Poland, and he actually argued that saying, 'Down with the Nazi government,' was 'quite indefensible' and that it was up to the German people if they wanted a dictatorship. I table the letter from Bob Menzies to Stanley Bruce that shows that he was advocating appeasement of Adolf Hitler 10 days after Poland was invaded, and that continued. Their party continued to be weak on national security throughout their entire history. They took us to Vietnam on a lie, where 523 Australians died because of a lie that they wanted to win an election on. They took us into the second Gulf War on a lie because they wanted to take us to another election that they wanted to win. It's all about politics for them because, ultimately, they are weak on national security. They love a khaki election and they love their Top Gun moment, but, in the end, they will use the troops for political props but never deliver for them. Just look at the opposition leader's record: 97 years cumulatively late for 28 major projects and $6½ billion over budget, spending $114 million on a naval shipbuilding college that trained zero workers. By contrast, the Albanese Labor government is investing record amounts into defence. Each year of our forward estimates, we spend more on capability acquisition and sustainment than any government in the history of this country. Every year, over the forward estimates, we spend more on the Australian defence industry than any government in the history of this country. Over the decade, we will increase defence spending to 2.3 per cent of GDP. We've actually funded AUKUS. We've actually funded the nuclear submarine enterprise. We're delivering it, and the early investments are flowing. We're training sailors now in the United States. We're training defence industry workers overseas in this endeavour. We're making significant reforms to defence procurement because we do need to improve what we deliver for taxpayer money and increase the speed of getting vital equipment to the ADF. We take it in a calm, measured way that delivers for the troops, that delivers for taxpayers and that doesn't have a revolving door of ministers like we saw under that deeply silly government we inherited this situation from, a government that was obsessed with political props rather than delivering for the troops. In the end, like their predecessor coalition governments, they'll be condemned by history for their weakness on national security and their inability to prepare our nation. 15:32 Mr JOYCE e5d New England I can't believe that, in something so important, we have something so puerile as a person tabling a letter between Robert Gordon Menzies and Stanley Bruce. How on earth is that relevant to the things that are before us? Your children are going to live in a different world to us. We've had Wang Yi, who has made tours of Timor-Leste, of Papua New Guinea, of the Solomon Islands, of Kiribati, of the Cook Islands and of Fiji and who's also had online meetings with so many areas, like the Federated States of Micronesia. Why are they doing this? Because they are encircling Australia. This is a process of encirclement of Australia. We have to realise how important this is. Back in November the Prime Minister of Australia said that defence was a top priority. We have a defence minister who tells us how good a job he's doing. Do you know which two people are not in this chamber right now? The Prime Minister of Australia and, on an MPI about defence, the defence minister. Neither of them is here. This is an issue of utmost importance. As the member for Canning has said, we have issues not only with China but with the provocations of Iran and third parties such as the Houthis, Hamas and Hezbollah. This is a new world we're living in. They're probing. We have the rogue state of North Korea, which is basically working as an adjunct at times, I believe, with the People's Republic of China—just tempting, probing, seeing. We have Russia, which has actually invaded another nation. Everybody thought it would come to an end. Everybody thought they'd ride over the horizon and everything would be right, but it's not. The world has changed. We have to have a government that wakes up and deals with that. If we keep on letting our Defence Force numbers fall down, we are making our nation weaker. If we are unable to put a ship in the Middle East to protect the Suez Canal, we are putting on display on a big board to the whole world that we are weaker. These are the issues that are before us. He should have tabled the frigates that have been launched and the warships that have been built. He should have tabled that, but he can't, because they just don't exist. We have had a review. We're having reviews after reviews, but we are not having the substantive action that's needed to defend this nation. They always say 'sine qua non'—without this, nothing. If we do not have a defence force, we have nothing. And, to defend our nation, we have to become as powerful as possible as quickly as possible. Today, at two o'clock, Loy Yang A went offline. The wholesale price of electricity, whilst we have been sitting in this chamber, has gone through the roof. This is a sign. How can a nation that can't even provide power to itself have the capacity to defend itself? These are the issues that are befalling us right now. As George Santayana said, those who don't remember history are condemned to repeat it. So, if you want to borrow something from history, I say to the minister, then don't table a letter from Robert Gordon Menzies to Stanley Melbourne Bruce; what you should be doing is tabling a historical document of what happens to a nation such as Australia when our trade routes and our supply corridors to the United States of America are cut off. That's what you should be tabling. That's what you should be aware of. That's what a prudent and proper defence bench would be able to do. They'd be able to come in here and talk about that and talk about what their solution is. But we can't get that. We get funny little parlour games about what they're doing. I'll just chip in one more thing: to say that our actions in Vietnam were wrong is an absolute disgrace. It's a disgrace to those who served and a disgrace to those who died. Are you saying they died for nothing? Are you saying they served for nothing? That was to exhaust the communist insurgency that was happening at that time of their resources. Seek out and close with the enemy, kill or capture them by day or by night, regardless of season, weather or terrain—that's what those service men and women of Australia did. I ask you to come back into the chamber and take that comment back. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Before I proceed, I am going to ask everybody in this chamber to dial it down. I am not impressed; members of the public are not impressed. Have a bit of respect for each other during this debate. MPIs are robust opportunities, but that's enough. 15:37 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills If there were ever a time for a lesson in psychology, it would be today. If there were ever an MPI that highlighted the human capacity for denial, this one would be it. I'm actually floored that those opposite would seek to put up an MPI on the current government and talk about mismanagement when we can clearly see that the historical record of the last nine years of coalition government is the actual gold standard, the perfect example, of mismanagement. Psychological experts characterise what they're doing as something called 'projecting'. It's a condition from which those opposite are clearly suffering, amongst probably many other psychological maladies, which we've seen play out in the ABC documentary Nemesis. This condition of projecting is where those opposite want to externalise their own incompetence, negligence and mismanagement onto others—in this case, the current government. It's a sad psychological state of affairs, but they do it because—and this is the experts speaking—it helps the individuals protect their self-esteem and avoid confronting the uncomfortable truths about themselves and their own traits. I think that's a little bit late, given what we've seen on the ABC. The primary projector is none other than the opposition leader himself, Peter Dutton, who was a former minister for defence. We know that Mr Dutton oversaw the worst failures in the coalition during their nine years. We've heard it from previous speakers—the whopping $3.8 billion on the MRH-90 helicopters for the Army and special forces that cannot even fire their own weapons because the doors were too narrow. The coalition government spent $1.16 billion on new battlefield airlifter aircraft that can't fly into battlefields. Under the former government, poor-quality manufacturing led to pipes being contaminated and our sailors not even being given access to quality, safe drinking water. Perhaps, with all of that actual mismanagement—the facts of that, the historical record—the opposition leader may have to answer for that in the next doco. The current shadow minister for defence is Mr Hastie. I acknowledge his service to the country. I respect it and I acknowledge it. He himself is a former Assistant Minister for Defence, and he said this about his own party: … we squandered a lot of opportunity through leadership changes … which led to inertia institutionally… Mr Hastie also said that under his government defence had too many ministers. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I'm just going to ask the member for Wills to use the member's title when referring to him. Mr KHALIL 101351 The member for Canning said they had too many ministers in defence. If we're looking for factors contributing to mismanagement, look at the coalition mismanagement of defence. The coalition government had six ministers for defence in nine years. They had four ministers for defence industry over four years. And once again, who was central to all this—the leadership changes, the inertia and the mismanagement? It was the opposition leader. That brings me to my next psychological malady: deflection. The opposition leader is not only a master projector in that sense, projecting onto others, but also a compulsive deflector. The mismanagement goes beyond the coalition's record in defence. We saw yesterday the Richardson report handed down, after a review of allegations of systemic misuse of taxpayer money. Guess who oversaw this? The opposition leader. We know that. The opposition leader has a compulsive need to deflect from his abject failures as both the Minister for Defence and the Minister for Home Affairs in the previous coalition government. He likes to posture, he likes to deflect and he likes to project. Unfortunately, the rest of the team over there on the opposite side are following in those footsteps by bringing this MPI forward. In contrast, this government has taken responsibility for cleaning up the mess and mismanagement of nine long years under the coalition, and our focus has been solely on keeping Australians safe. Our first action as a government was to commission the Defence Strategic Review and set an ambitious agenda for Australia's defence that moves our country forward and ensures the safety of all Australians. And we've made substantive reforms—they say that we haven't—in relation to early warning criteria on projects of concern, in raising attention on emerging problems and encouraging early response, and in making sure that we're getting the defence budget back on track. We've added $30.5 billion to defence funding across the decade. Those opposite can project and deflect all they like, but it will never change the reality that their mismanagement of defence for nine years will always and forever be in the history books as a blight on their record. 15:42 Mr THOMPSON 281826 Herbert The Minister for Defence is more interested in playing the back nine than he is in looking after the members of the Australian Defence Force, and that has been evident with what we've seen lately, but it's what we have been seeing since this Minister for Defence came to office. He's a part-time minister. He is the Deputy Prime Minister and then wants to moonlight as the Minister for Defence. Government members have now come in and said how bad the coalition is. Well, at the end of the day, you guys have the big seats, right? You've got the big offices, and it's up to you to make sure that our Defence Force are supported. Right now, they're not. We have a record amount of people discharging from the ADF, and we need to ask the question why. They don't feel supported at all. We've seen that just recently. In the front page of the paper today, it says 'Aussie troops thin on ground'. That was the front page of the Townsville Bulletin. That is the home of the Australian Defence Force. It's the capital of the Australian Defence Force. More people are getting out every year, because they're not supported. A way that this government should have supported the Australian Defence Force is by supporting those who gave up so much of their time, spent time away from family, to help out during Operation COVID-19 Assist in the pandemic. They helped out on the borders. They answered the call, many for weeks, sometimes months, on end. I wrote to the Minister for Defence saying that these members of the ADF deserve the National Emergency Medal, and it was rejected. In the letter I got back just before, the minister said that due to the circumstances and nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, recognition of service under these circumstances is not considered appropriate. What a slap in the face to all of the ADF members who helped this nation, who answered the call, who put themselves and their families at risk to keep the community safe, who went into the border to help out this nation in the time of a pandemic. They have now been told that they don't deserve the National Emergency Medal—they don't deserve any recognition. I think it's disgraceful. It was also disgraceful to hear the comments from the Minister for Defence this week where he said: … there is a way to go before we have that culture of excellence in the Department of Defence and the Australian Defence Force. That is ridiculous. To say that the brave men and women who put on the uniform every day do not have a culture of excellence is a disgrace. It is absolutely disgraceful. I got so many phone calls, emails and texts from people who are still serving who say that they're absolutely doing everything right. They stand up every day. They want to be counted. They want to help. They put on the uniform for a life of service. To hear their minister say that they do not have a culture of excellence, I think, is disgraceful. It just shows the lack of interest this part-time minister has in supporting the brave men and women of the ADF. We've seen cuts and slashes to defence industry, with the number of infantry fighting vehicles to be purchased cut from 450 to 129. We didn't see any government minister at Land Forces. They couldn't be bothered showing up. That is the largest defence industry event, and we didn't have any of the government ministers there. That is not just shameful; it's disgraceful. And to have the Minister for Defence Industry stand up in here and say all those nasty things about the second gulf war and Vietnam just shows how out of step this government really is when it comes to protecting and serving for the Australian Defence Force. During question time today we heard the Minister for Veterans' Affairs—he's not in cabinet, so the Minister for Defence takes ownership of that in cabinet—talk about how great the Department of Veterans' Affairs is going. Well, I can tell you what happened just yesterday. An Afghanistan war veteran, Paul Warren, who lost his leg, had had his prosthetic leg snap. He rang up the department said: 'My prosthetic leg snapped. I need support.' They said: 'Just go hire a wheelchair. We'll have to get back to you soon. You'll have to go find a specialist appointment.' What a disgrace. These issues are currently happening to our veterans, but we don't hear anything from ministers about it. They want to push it away, push it under the rug. This goes back to the heart of this MPI. If you don't treat your veterans well, you're not going to get people signing up to the ADF. If you don't treat your current serving personnel well, you're not going to get people that want to sign up. This is ridiculous, and the minister should be in here listening to these speeches. Instead of playing golf, they should be sitting in here answering these questions. 15:47 Mrs PHILLIPS 147140 Gilmore In my electorate of Gilmore on the New South Wales South Coast, we are incredibly proud of our defence members. The South Coast is home to HMAS Albatross, the largest operational Naval establishment in Australia and the Navy's only air station. We are also home to HMAS Creswell, the Royal Australian Naval College, based in beautiful Jervis Bay. Our community is rightly proud of our defence family, and anyone who has spent any time with our Defence Force personnel would be equally as proud of them. For three days in November last year, I joined the Australian Army's Special Operations Command at the Australian Defence Force Parachuting School in Nowra, as part of the ADF parliamentary exchange. What an amazing experience that was—so good in fact that I have already signed myself up again this year. Last year it was ADF parachuting. This year it is helicopter underwater escape training and ships survivability training, with hopefully another parachute jump, this time into Jervis Bay. What could be better! I had one key takeaway from this experience—that those serving in our Defence Force are highly skilled, incredibly dedicated and passionate about what they do, and what they do is beyond what we could ever imagine. These men and women take their lives in their hands, quite literally, every single day for us so that we can enjoy our peaceful lifestyle. At the ADF Parachuting School, they train our special operations defence members, like commandos, to parachute. My tandem jump, as I have shared with the House before, didn't go to plan. We had a one-in-750 chance of a parachute canopy malfunction, and that's what happened. We spun and we spun downwards. But I knew that my ADF parachutist had loads and loads of experience. I guess you never know how you will react in that situation, but I certainly remember what he told me and all those safety measures. After the safety checks failed, he cut away the parachute and pulled the reserve parachute, and we landed with that. The next part, the fractured ankle, was all my fault. After all, I was a bit eager to get back to land. When we landed, I was told to go and fight the Taliban—which, Madam Deputy Speaker, is the point. Special Operations Command Defence members parachute into war zones, from high altitudes, in freezing conditions, and with the biggest packs and weapons—extremely difficult and dangerous situations. When they jump out of a plane, something could go wrong. Regardless of whether or not you're injured, when you hit the ground you have to be up and running, ready for what is there on the ground. I am in awe of our Defence members; they are simply amazing. What I want to see, as a proud local member in a Defence town, is our Defence Force members being supported and celebrated with genuine appreciation for their service. I will never bat away improvements to our local Defence facilities and services, whether it's for our community and our much loved 'chopper on a stick', a security gate for the ADF Parachuting School or more. That's why last year I was pleased to join with the Minister for Defence Industry to announce $124 million for a major upgrade to the airfield at HMAS Albatross. From mid-2025, we'll see our local fleet of MH-60R Seahawk 'Romeo' helicopters expanded from the current 23 aircraft to 36 aircraft. The upgrades will ensure the airfield continues to safely support our Navy operations while growing our local defence jobs. Not only does the Shoalhaven boast a significant number of ADF employees; it also has a large number of civilian employees working on the base and a thriving defence industry. In fact, Defence and defence industry are our biggest employers—local expertise and local products supporting our defence operations. We're recruiting local people into Defence and defence industry by showing them the vast opportunities available. As just one fabulous example, the new Commander of the Fleet Air Arm, Commodore Matthew Royals, grew up on the South Coast. He went to Shoalhaven High School. He says himself that his passion for the Navy started at home, with his exposure to helicopters flying over his school—an inspiring story for many. We're investing in our local bases to make sure they can support our defence personnel and technology. We believe in defence, we understand how important it is for our country, and we are so proud of our Defence Force members. 15:52 Mrs McINTOSH 281513 Lindsay To start off, I would like to give a shout-out to my local veterans, particularly our veterans at the St Marys Vietnam Veterans Outpost. The extraordinary work that you do in our community to ensure that we remember the sacrifices that are being made is something that really touches me, my family and our whole committee. Thank you very much. There has never been more of a wake-up call on sovereign capability than COVID, which meant securing our supply chains and protecting our country, and today, post-COVID, we are experiencing some of the most uncertain times globally. What should we have in a time like this, which is so uncertain and so unstable? We should have urgency. Do you know what urgency is, Madam Deputy Speaker? It is the importance of swift action, imperativeness, haste. There is no definition of urgency that says, 'We should have another review, another meeting and go slow.' That is what this government is doing. As my friend the honourable member for Canning said, there is nothing more pressing for an Australian government than the defence of the nation, and I would particularly like to give a shout-out to those who work so hard at Defence Establishment Orchard Hills, in my electorate of Lindsay, to ensure our weapons are kept safe. They are maintaining such extraordinary work in the most uncertain times. Unfortunately, we have the Labor Party at the helm when we are in the midst of the most challenging geostrategic moment in our lives, with China consistently knocking on the doors of our Indo-Pacific neighbours with promises of infrastructure and security in exchange for not recognising Taiwan and cutting strong and, previously, enduring relationships with Australia. China is building its defence capability at a rapid speed and this is troubling for what could occur should tensions rise for us and the Indo-Pacific community yet, again—go slow, no urgency—this Albanese Labor government is stalling on strategic defence decisions and is just not up to the job of defending our country. Not only is China causing disturbance but we have conflict waging in Ukraine against the Russian invasion, yet we have the Albanese Labor government continuing to use this conflict as a cover for inflation and price rises at the bowser despite committing to savings when he was in opposition while the situation overseas was advancing. The ongoing crisis occurring in the Middle East, with Hamas still refusing to release hostages to Israel, is a disgrace. As part of this, militants in the region have started to attack ships. What is the Albanese Labor government doing to assist in the Red Sea? There were revelations out of estimates yesterday that the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet had no involvement in whether we would send a warship to assist in efforts and operations in the Red Sea. Why was the United States' request not important enough for the Minister for Defence and our nation's Deputy Prime Minister to not take the matter to the Prime Minister for discussion by the National Security Committee? This is extraordinary. There has been question after question not answered—failure after failure after failure, no urgency, just go slow. The Prime Minister and the defence minister were ministers in the previous Labor government when defence spending was slashed to levels below that of 1938. I wonder if the Prime Minister had anything to say in the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years when China's defence spending and capability grew extraordinarily despite the government he was a senior member of not commissioning a single vessel in the Australian shipyard, not a single one. The world is watching us, our AUKUS partners are watching us but, even more importantly, our enemies are watching us, and what are we doing? The global strategic environment is increasingly facing harder headwinds. If we had a government that was focused on key priorities like boosting defence capability, boosting recruitment, looking after our Defence Force—not putting them down—and boosting investment at a local level in defence and domestic manufacturing, we would have a safer nation. 15:57 Dr REID 300126 Robertson Like the member for Lindsay, I also acknowledge the veterans and active ADF personnel both here in this chamber and back in my electorate of Robertson. Thank you for keeping us safe and secure. Right at this very moment and across the world, we are witnessing and experiencing the effects of great power competition. The path, the progress and the outcome of that competition are extremely complex and extremely uncertain. There is incredible strain and incredible pressure on the global rules based order, whether that be throughout the Indo-Pacific, a region that is growing rapidly, or in Eastern Europe. To be absolutely clear in this chamber here today and to the community watching at home more broadly, in our country's most difficult moments, in particular throughout our defence history and national security, Australians young and old and from all walks of life look to the Australian Labor Party. Our track record on defence and national security speaks for itself and speaks to how Labor keeps our people safe. It was the Fisher Labor government in 1913 which established our Navy. It was John Curtin, a person who I particularly admire, who did what had to be done during the Second World War and organised Australia's national defence, made critical decisions, stood tall and ensured Australian independence. It was Gough Whitlam, a former Air Force navigator and veteran of the Second World War, and his government who unified the three armed services into a single Defence Force. And let's not forget Kim Beazley, former defence minister, who implemented the strategic posture for defence, which lasted 36 years. As a political party, the Liberal Party—the conservatives—do not have a history with defence policy or national security that even comes close to what has been achieved by our movement on this side of the House, the Australian Labor Party. In fact, when it comes to defence, their party is amateur. It is known throughout the history of our country, both now and into the future, that Labor is the true party of Australia's national defence. Once again, the people of Australia are looking to our movement. Our record on defence shows how unaware and blind the opposition is. Our government has announced and delivered major reforms to the Projects of Concern process, including establishing an independent projects and portfolio management office within Defence, reporting monthly directly to the minister and fostering a culture in Defence of raising attention to emerging problems and encouraging and enabling an early response. We're providing troubled projects with extra resources and skills, convening regular ministerial summits to discuss remediation plans and ensuring the Defence budget is ready, lifting it to 2.3 per cent of GDP—0.2 per cent higher than what the opposition had planned. We have provided an additional $30.5 billion for Defence across the decade as part of our last budget. Now let's look at our record on defence projects. We have delivered continuous naval shipbuilding in Western Australia through the selection of a pilot sovereign shipbuilder and the Army landing craft project. We are delivering on guided weapons and explosive ordnance enterprise, where we will manufacture missiles—the guided multiple-launch rocket systems—in Australia, and that is not just an empty promise. We have signed a multimillion-dollar contract with Lockheed Martin to see this work delivered. We are significantly uplifting and securing our war stocks, with 42 high-mobility artillery rocket systems and ammunition, 200 Tomahawk missiles, 60 advanced antiradiation guided missiles with extended range and millions for SPIKE long-range 2 antitank guided missiles for our combat reconnaissance vehicles. It is clear from what I have just said and from speakers we have heard from on this side of the chamber that the Australian Labor Party, currently led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, is the party of national security, the party of defence and the party that will keep our people safe. 16:02 Mr PEARCE 282306 Braddon I acknowledge the previous speaker's points in relation to the procurement of equipment. What I want to talk about today is something far more important. It's the people behind the equipment. It's the personnel that I'm worried about. When you start looking at the ADF's mission and purpose, which is 'to defend Australia and its national interests in order to advance Australia's security and prosperity', it is a very clear, concise, succinct and direct statement. That's what mission statements are like. If we compare that to the paradox, conundrum and inconsistency behind what has been released, talked about lately and mooted by the Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence, they obviously find that defence and security in this country is uppermost, and yet the Deputy Prime Minister happens to be the Minister for Defence. It's a part-time role. I find that a conundrum. I can't get my head around it. Even Beazley devoted himself when he was the Minister for Defence. He was a good minister, but that was his whole and sole role. That's the conundrum I face. He talked about procurement, including precision guided missiles, LAND 400, LAND 8116, LAND 129 and a number of other projects. He's certainly across his subject. But I've been raising this point for several years: if we are not careful as a Defence Force—as a country—then we are going to have insufficient personnel trained to operate that equipment. It takes a long time, particularly given the specialist roles that we're seeing in Defence. Defence is becoming a multifaceted technical game. I spent two decades of my life training electronic warfare operators at 7th Combat Signal Regiment. It used to take me four to five years to train an operator. Look at the exit rates from Defence that we've seen recently. It has been revealed that in the year ending 30 June 2023 there was an outflow of 1,373 people from Defence and an inflow of 1,252. Those numbers don't add up. Defence also confirmed that in that year they were some 800 people below their recruitment target. They'd achieved only 41.7 per cent of the target. Defence is bleeding personnel in the well-trained scientific and specialist roles that we need to put behind these pieces of equipment. The other question I continually raise is: who is controlling this? Where is what we call the C4—the command, control, communications and computer systems—to target this equipment and pick up targets? Where is that? Where are the surveillance and reconnaissance behind all that, and where are the trained operators who put a weapons system on a target? Numbers like this are disgraceful. It breaks my heart to see numbers like this out of our Defence recruiting statistics. My job was to stand in front of diggers to train them and make sure they did their job. My job, as the interface between the enlisted soldiers and the officers, was one that I took very seriously. I stood up for them, and, when the wrong thing was being done to them, I was the one who stood in front of them. You build a very close bond with those diggers. At the moment, they're doing the right thing, but at strategic and government levels they're not seeing a focus back on personnel. No-one's mentioned it today! No-one's mentioned diggers. The member for Herbert did—probably because he was one and has felt like them. We need to bring the focus back onto personnel. Mr PEARCE 282306 You can carry on all you like and interject, but the subject of personnel is very serious to me. It's a subject that I think needs to be at the forefront— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 Member for Hasluck, I have asked you not to interject before. You are wasting time in the debate. Mr PEARCE 282306 Rather than political pointscoring, we need to get back to what is really important. As far as I'm concerned, it's those soldiers, sailors and airmen who are at the centre of all this. 16:07 Mr BURNELL 300129 Spence It's great to be back for my first MPI of the parliamentary sitting year. We saw those opposite fumble on industrial relations, and we are watching in real time those opposite capitulating and joining with the Albanese Labor government in giving Middle Australia a tax cut over themselves and other high-income earners. They are clenching their teeth in doing so. All of this is with the backdrop of those opposite putting on a third marvellous display last night in the final instalment of Nemesis. There have often been at least one or two of the cast in the chamber doing a curtain call. I'm sure that, soon enough, we'll be seeing an encore. One of the cast of Nemesis, in fact, was the one who brought the MPI here today, the member for Canning, and I sincerely thank him for doing so. He has so generously given us the opportunity to talk about defence and our defence industry, leaving on the table a blank cheque on those opposite's record during the Nemesis years. Sometimes the fish really does jump onto the hook. We are more than happy to give the opposition's record as much airtime as possible. That is more than I can say for the battlefield airlifter and our MRH-90 helicopters, $1.16 billion and $3.8 billion respectively. As an aside, one of my favourite bands, blink-182, is touring Australia, including back in Adelaide last night and tonight. Their lyrics got stuck in my head once more when I was writing some of the remarks for this discussion: 'Don't waste your time on me.' It made me think of the billions of dollars of waste in defence spending under the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison governments and the many time blow-outs of the projects green-lit under their watch. It's a mess that the Albanese government must clean up. How much time, might you ask, Madam Deputy Speaker? Under those opposite, 28 major projects have blown out by a total of 97 years—indeed, hardly anyone's definition of 'hasty'. This is extremely troubling for any government that is expecting to protect our national security at a moment in history when we are tackling the most challenging strategic circumstances since World War II. I, frankly, can't blame those opposite too much for the results of their time in office. How many ministers for defence did they go through? Six. The last cab off the rack in that list was, of course, the now Leader of the Opposition, after he tried his luck with seeing how Australians responded to seeing him try to smile more. Of assistant ministers, there were six again. In defence industry, with all of the rebranding of that portfolio, we had a total of seven ministers under their government. One amongst the number of assistant ministers for defence was, of course, the member for Canning himself, whose service record prior to this place, I would gladly say, is something to be proud of, and I do thank him for his service, as well as the member for Hasluck, the member for Herbert and the member for Braddon, who are in the chamber here today. But, in aggregate, none of their ministers and assistants was as terrible as the sum of all their parts combined. Those opposite may think 18 months is enough time for ministers in the Defence portfolio to correct their course. With the rate of turnover during the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government, I can see why they would think that. But now, with the Albanese Labor government steering the ship—a ship that isn't made of faulty Chinese made aluminium, unlike the Cape class patrol boats those opposite greenlit—the record of those opposite on defence is a sunk fallacy indeed, going from littoral movements to literal mistakes—mistakes our men and women serving in the Australian Defence Force deserve better than to have settled for. I know the member for Canning knows this through and through. As recently as March last year he conceded that he saw a lot of waste, a statement that would qualify as at least an honourable mention in the understatement of the year rankings. He even conceded the churn of ministers led to delays and inertia. I know he wouldn't debate me on this. The member for Canning has publicly stated this as a valid criticism of their time in government. But now, in opposition, their memory is seemingly wiped, unless the ABC sticks a camera in front of them. It's ironic to hear the most insecure amongst our parliament accusing us of being weak on security. Under our government—the Deputy Prime Minister, the Assistant Minister for Defence and the Minister for Defence Industry, who we heard from earlier—we have a chance of manufacturing our AUKUS submarines, not just as an announcement under those opposite but as a longstanding part of our national defence for years to come. Labor governments so often have to be the ones to correct the mess, the rorts and the waste under Liberal-National governments. We have the vision to look toward our nation's future, whilst those opposite only have eyes for playing politics and talking about themselves. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 The discussion has concluded. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 That includes interjections, Member for Herbert. BUSINESS 42 BUSINESS Rearrangement 42 16:12 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That business intervening before notice No. 1, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day. Question agreed to. Rearrangement 42 16:13 Mr BURKE DYW Watson I move: That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following from occurring in relation to proceedings on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024: (1) on Tuesday, 13 February when the order of the day relating to the second reading debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 is called on following the matter of public importance, a cognate debate taking place with the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024, and continuing without interruption until no further Members rise to speak, or the commencement of the adjournment debate at 7.30 pm; (2) notwithstanding standing order 31, if the second reading debate has not concluded earlier, at 8 pm the adjournment debate being interrupted and the bills being called on for further consideration, with the second reading debate continuing until: (a) no further Members rise to speak; or (b) 10 pm; at which point, debate being adjourned and the House immediately adjourning until Wednesday, 14 February at 9 am; (3) on Wednesday 14 February when the order of the day relating to the second reading debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 is called on following the matter of public importance, a cognate debate taking place with the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024, and continuing without interruption until no further Members rise to speak, or the commencement of the adjournment debate at 7.30 pm; (4) notwithstanding standing order 31, if the second reading debate has not concluded earlier, at 8pm the adjournment debate being interrupted and the bills being called on for further consideration, with the second reading debate continuing until no further Members rise to speak, at which point debate being adjourned and the House immediately adjourning until Thursday, 15 February at 9 am; (5) on Thursday, 15 February, when the order of the day relating to the second reading debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 is called on: (a) questions being immediately put on any amendments moved to the motion for the second reading and on the second reading of the bill; (b) if required, a consideration in detail stage of the bill, with the bill being taken as a whole; (c) at no later than 1 pm on Thursday, 15 February, any remaining questions required to conclude consideration in detail being put with no further debate; and (d) when the bill has been agreed to, the question being put immediately on the third reading of the bill; (6) following the conclusion of proceedings on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024 being immediately called on, and any questions necessary to complete the remaining stages of the bill being put without amendment or debate; and (7) any variation to this arrangement being made only on a motion moved by a Minister. I understand there are going to be other speakers, so, in terms of the times that I offer as to how late this will go tomorrow night, some of that depends on how long we spend debating the procedure. I'll try to be brief, but I'll leave it to others to make their own call. The intention here is that, because there have been such strong views around the parliament on the government's tax plan, we want everyone who is on the list to be able to speak and we don't want people to have their speaking time cut short. As you'd be aware, last week we did one late night. We did a late night last night. Tonight we'd similarly go till 10 o'clock. Tomorrow night, on the current length of the speaking list, we'd go through till 8.30 pm, but there would be capacity for it to go later either if people add to the speaking list or if the House is disrupted in other ways. Then we would deal with consideration in detail on the Thursday morning. We'd start on Thursday morning with a division if required, although I don't see any indication that there's going to be a division on the bill—although possibly there might be one on the second reading amendment or something like that. The argument will be made, I'm sure—by a different person, but I suspect it's a similar script—that somehow this involves a gag and guillotine of debate. If I can explain: for the Morrison government tax cuts the second reading debate ended up being closed with the motion that the question be put after one hour and 45 minutes of debate. Already we have had 10 hours, with 47 speakers after introduction. I expect there'll be another five or six hours of debate today, another four hours tomorrow morning and then however late it goes tomorrow to make sure every member gets to speak. That's somewhat different to one hour and 45 minutes, and whoever is about to stand up and say that this is an outrageous motion will I suspect be one of the people who voted in favour of the question being put after one hour and 45 minutes. I know I shouldn't pre-empt. Maybe I'll get a declaration of admiration! Let's just see how we go. The consideration in detail on the tax cuts for the Morrison government went for an hour and a half. But don't think that was an hour and a half of debate: 28 minutes of that time was taken up with divisions, shutting people down and preventing people from speaking. Based on the speaking list that's currently in front of us, in terms of comparison with previous tax bills, debate time should go for 12 times longer than what happened with the Morrison government, and in terms of consideration in detail, more than double the time of the Morrison government's tax legislation without people spending half an hour in divisions. That's what this resolution would do. I'll commend it to the House. It means everyone gets to speak. It's a significant difference to previous terms as to how we've debated tax legislation. And we will now cue to either logic or outrage—I'll leave it to you. 16:17 Mr TEHAN 210911 Wannon We weren't going to say anything. We were just going to let this go through, and we're still going to do that. But, given that the minister was there trying to apologise for the fact that he's gagging and trying to use other examples, I thought, 'Well, I'd better get up and just have a little bit of fun.' With all that effort he went to, to make out that he wasn't gagging when that's what he's done, it probably needed to be pointed out. We're not going to oppose this. But given that the minister spent so long trying to apologise, in a fairly funny way, for what he was doing and wouldn't just face up and just say, 'Well, this is what we're doing,' I just thought I'd get up and make the point that sometimes it's better to just be straight, Minister! The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 If there are no further speakers, I am putting the question that the motion be agreed to. Question agreed to. An honourable member interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 248181 I love a bit of universal love in the House! BILLS 44 BILLS Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023 44

Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023

Second Reading 44 16:19 Mr COLEMAN 241067 Banks I rise to speak on the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill. This is a bill that sits within the regime of telecommunications legislation in Australia, which is a very important part of law in Australia because today telecommunications has such broad reach—through our phones, through our internet connected devices—and the powers and abilities of the federal government to get involved in this area of the lives of Australians is very, very high indeed. This bill is part of a concerning family of legislation that has been put forward by this minister, the Minister for Communications, within this realm of telecommunications law—none more concerning than the extraordinary and historically remarkable, and not in a good way, bill that was put forward in relation to misinformation. Last year, the minister released an exposure draft of telecommunications legislation that would seek to give the regulator power to reach into the operations of digital platforms and make assessments about misinformation. The huge issue is once the government is defining what misinformation is in a democracy, you are on very shaky ground indeed. When the minister released that exposure draft, she said: 'This is all about ACMA. It's all about the regulator.' But what we learned, through a freedom of information application just before Christmas, is that the minister, under that exposure draft, in fact has the power to personally order an investigation into allegations of misinformation into Australians and into digital platforms. It's there in black-and-white in a letter that the minister wrote to the Prime Minister but did not release, and the Prime Minister's delegate, the assistant minister, wrote back and said: 'Great idea! Let's do it. Let's give the minister the power to personally order investigations into allegations of misinformation.' In a democracy, of which we are one of the world's very greatest, that is an extraordinary thing to do. The minister had to withdraw that legislation because it was so appalling and because of the backlash from pretty much every section of Australian society. We are told that it will be coming back before this parliament in the not-to-distant future, and I expect we will see a titanic battle when that does occur. That's just one of the important areas of telecommunications legislation that's being debated before this parliament and in this chamber. It's an extraordinary piece of legislation. Despite a lack of legislation in telecommunications, this minister ignored—in fact, worse than ignored; explicitly decided to go against the very clear recommendation of the highly respected eSafety Commissioner to implement a system for age assurance technology online. What would that do? It would help to keep Australian kids safe from the most appalling and dangerous online content. If a digital platform can just say, 'We didn't know how old that person was, sorry; Australian kids were exposed all this horrendous content, but we didn't know how old they were so it's not our fault,' then it's very convenient for the digital platform. What the eSafety Commissioner has said is we should trial a system of age assurance technology, a similar concept age verification, where we say, 'If you are going to be providing content like pornography or other content that is potentially dangerous to children, you need to verify age and you need to ensure you're not providing this to kids.' What could be more sensible than that? What could be more unifying than that? Frankly, what Australian would say that was a bad idea? Well, I know one Australian who thinks it's a bad idea, and that's the Minister for Communications. Despite the very clear recommendation from the highly respected eSafety Commissioner, this Minister for Communications said, 'No, I don't want to do that. Let's leave it to the industry.' But what's the industry we're actually talking about here? It's the pornography industry. So, whilst Australia's leading child safety experts came out and condemned this decision of the government, do you know who welcomed it? The Eros Foundation—representing, as they do, the pornography industry—welcomed it. Great. Well done, Minister Rowland. So you've got 50 leading child safety and women's safety experts on one side and the Eros Foundation on the other, and the minister says, 'No, I don't want to go with those child safety or women's safety experts, I don't want to support Grace Tame of the Grace Tame Foundation, I don't want to support Chanel Contos of Teach Us Consent and I don't want to support Bravehearts or the Daniel Morcombe Foundation or the extraordinary array of experts who spoke out on this issue.' The minister said, 'No, I'm not going to do that.' The coalition, in this very chamber late last year, moved a suspension of standing orders to make the minister do that, because the minister was refusing to do that. The vehicle through which we can change the conduct of ministers when they behave in this way is, ultimately, this chamber. So we brought legislation to this chamber to say, 'No, Minister, you must conduct this trial. You don't want to do it—we're clear on that—but you've got to do it because the chamber's going to tell you to do it because we should be backing the eSafety Commissioner and backing the safety of the children of Australia.' This legislation was widely supported in the parliament, including, from memory, by all of the independent members of parliament and the coalition. But every single member of the government voted against it. I suspect that many members of the government, if they'd had an opportunity to reflect on what it was they were voting against, would have had real concerns with the very unfortunate position that this minister had put them in, which is an unfortunate reflection on the priorities and the conduct of this minister. We're also seeing another very important issue in telecommunications legislation. AI has become something of a buzzword and a bit of a cliche in political debate, but the challenges around AI are very real—both in a positive sense in relation to the incredible opportunities that AI can create but also in relation to the risks. The concerns about potential malevolent uses of AI are legitimate concerns and serious issues and they need to be considered very carefully. If you are ultimately going to say, 'We need to take some action to defend against those worst-case scenarios in AI,' the way you do that is, I think inevitably, through some form of legislation or regulation in the telecommunications and internet space. However, for reasons that are entirely unclear, the government has not made the Minister for Communications the minister responsible for AI. So we have this very odd situation where what is quite clearly the biggest long-run challenge—both in a positive sense and in terms of the risk that faces us in relation to the development of technology and the telecommunications sector in Australia—is around AI, but the minister who is responsible for the regulation of this area is not actually involved in leading the government's response. The minister is reduced to a supporting role with lots of other ministers, which doesn't make any sense at all. So there are a lot of concerns about what is going on in this portfolio, and particularly with these issues around telecommunications. From the government's perspective, the most significant entity when it comes to telecommunications is the NBN. It's a hugely significant entity. And what we're seeing under the watch of this minister are some very concerning trends with the NBN. This is important. In 2023, for the first time in its history, excluding new developments at new greenfields sites—where, of course, the NBN customer numbers will always grow—the NBN lost 43,000 customers. Across what they call brownfields, across satellite, the NBN lost 43,000 customers. That's on a net basis. And the rate of loss is increasing. In the five weeks to 1 February, we saw the NBN, outside of greenfields, lose another 5½ thousand customers. In fact, in those five weeks, from its satellite business, the NBN lost two per cent of its entire customer base in one month. Imagine that. There are some on this side of the chamber—I'm standing next to one right now—who have experience in actually running a business. Imagine if you lost two per cent of your customers in one month—big problems. The NBN's satellite business lost two per cent of its customers in the five weeks to 1 February. What the government says is: 'Well, those NBN customers are going to move across to the NBN fixed wireless product. That's what they're doing. It's all a very orderly process.' There's a bit of a problem with that, because in the five weeks to 1 February the NBN fixed wireless business also lost customers. If the two per cent who'd left the NBN satellite business were going to the NBN fixed wireless business, then that number should have gone up, but it actually went down. It remains to be seen whether this minister has any sort of strategic view on the NBN. It's not clear that the minister does. I think the government sees the NBN as a high-vis photo opportunity. But this is an incredibly important entity which is owned by Australian taxpayers, and what we are seeing for the very first time in its history under the watch of this government is that, apart from those greenfields developments, where the numbers will always grow, collectively, the other customers are going down—by 43,000 in 2023, by 5½ thousand in just the last few weeks. The minister did talk, in fairness, about the satellite losses. A year or so ago, the minister said, 'Alright: there are some issues in satellites, so what I'm going to do is I'm going to convene a round table.' A round table was convened. Academics were invited. But when you're going up against Elon Musk and his Starlink business, frankly, you need a little bit more than a government led round table. But that's pretty much all we've got from this minister. There are very significant problems with the NBN, and it is concerning that we don't really see the minister actually engage in any of these more strategic questions about the future of this incredibly important entity, an entity which, under this government, had a negative cash flow of $1 billion in the last six months. In the prior six-month period, the six months to the end of December 2022, the negative cash flow was around $600 million. So it has gotten $400 million worse in 12 months under this government, and $1 billion of cash has gone out the door in the last six months. Again, the response from this government is, 'Here's a high-vis photo opportunity,' and that's about it. Serious issues require serious stewardship. We're not really seeing that at all. We do need to talk about the Telecommunications Legislation Amendment (Enhancing Consumer Safeguards and Other Measures) Bill 2023. This is a bill that builds upon a process that was started by the coalition government when, back in 2020, we established the regime of what are known as statutory infrastructure providers, or SIPs. The NBN is the biggest SIP. It's not the only SIP; there are other, smaller SIPs as well. They're basically entities that provide internet services to homes, businesses and so on. There are a number of rules, sensible rules, that apply. If you're going to hold yourself out as a statutory infrastructure provider, there are certain things you need to be able to do. There are certain penalties if you don't do those things, and there are certain requirements. This bill seeks to build upon some of those existing requirements and take some further steps. For instance, it would bring in private networks into the SIP regime, which, to date, has not been the case. A private network is when a property developer—usually—creates a localised telecommunications network for a particular property development. Sometimes in the past those networks have not been included and, as a consequence, consumers have not been able to get the protection of the SIP regime when things go wrong. The government says we should extend the regime to include those private networks, and we think that is sensible. A number of others are modest and sensible changes to this bill. But on the point of competence, which is so important in government, this bill is reflective of another real trend we are seeing in this portfolio area. Broadly, you have two categories: failing or drifting. I have run through a number of the failing areas and this one I think, in fairness, is more in the drifting category. When I say 'drifting' I mean the minister has a bit of a problem here, because when the minister released this bill and consultation process back in August of 2022, she announced a new round of public consultation on these laws related to the SIP regime. She invited submissions on the draft bill and had a relatively short consultation period. People had to have their submissions in by the end of September '22. The minister said she pledged to introduce the bill into parliament by the end of 2022. It's 2024 now, so 2022 was quite a long time ago. The minister missed January, missed February, missed March, missed April, missed May, June, July—you're familiar with all the months. Only right at the end of 2023 did this bill materialise and, when it did, it was a bit of a surprise to the sector and stakeholders because they had not been consulted since 2022. It just sort of sat somewhere, piling up in the minister 's office, and this bill has come forward right at the end of 2023. It is a very real concern why it would take that long. Broadly, we on this side support these provisions. There is an area where the Senate needs to do some work in reviewing the provisions of this bill. It creates a division which enables further reporting by ACMA on the performance of telecommunications companies. That is sensible at the high level but there are concerns that the bill has been very sloppily drafted and doesn't take account of the different ways that different telecommunication companies report these matters, and there is a risk of confusion in the marketplace on the lack of clarity about reporting that comes as a part of the bill. The Senate committee will look into that and consider any sensible amendments that the Senate may put forward. Broadly, we do support this bill. We are disappointed that it went nowhere for a year. We are gravely concerned about the conduct of this portfolio overall in telecommunications regulation and, frankly, more broadly, leadership but we do not propose to oppose this bill and we look forward to any amendments or further discussions that may come from the Senate inquiry. Debate adjourned. National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024 46

National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024

Second Reading 46 16:39 Ms LEY 00AMN Farrer I rise to speak on the National Vocational Education and Training Regulator Amendment (Strengthening Quality and Integrity in Vocational Education and Training No. 1) Bill 2024. In doing so, I note that the most significant change proposed by this bill is for the Minister for Skills and Training to seek to directly control market entry of new registered training organisations I note the bill introduces a new power that allows the minister to direct the regulator, the Australian Skills Quality Authority, by legislative instrument to pause the registrations of new RTOs. I note this would need to be agreed with state and territory skills ministers. The bill also tightens rules for RTOs in their first two years of operation and makes a number of changes to the way ASQA processes and prioritises the registrations of new training organisations. The government has framed this bill as a response to integrity and quality issues within the training sector, as highlighted in the Nixon review, the Braithwaite review and the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's report 'Quality and integrity—the quest for sustainable growth': interim report into international education. While I thank the minister and his office for their constructive engagement on this bill, I also note feedback from across the sector that there was very minimal consultation on the bill before it was introduced. Given the track record of this government putting government-run training providers first, instead of students and their outcomes, the approach to this bill was cause for pause. That said, I have sought the views of the training sector and business groups on what this change would mean for them. While there is a high level of caution around this bill, particularly the minister's new power to pause the establishment of new training organisations, there is broad alignment on the intent of the bill. The opposition shares the views of the sector on this bill. Notwithstanding the alignment, noting the concerns around transparency and accountability of this new ministerial power, the opposition will be seeking to work constructively with the government and with the crossbench on some minor amendments that would force the minister to publicly justify the use of this power to the sector, to the parliament and to the public. We will also be seeking to mandate that a determination to pause the establishment of new training organisations be in place for no longer than 90 days. We believe this establishes a guardrail for this new power. I understand that, for process reasons, the government may seek to incorporate these amendments in the other place if there is not sufficient time in the House. The principle here is that we expect this power to be rarely used and therefore there should be transparency and accountability on it. It's important that we do not overreach with intervention. We have to support our dynamic and innovative skills and training sector. It is important that the government does not overbalance in pursuit of the worthy objective of quality outcomes. But, equally, we need to be aware of the consequences when the government gets this area of policy wrong. We should not forget why we are in this position in the first place and why we need to strengthen this regulator. I would be remiss if I did not remind the House of the record of Labor and skills policy when they were last in government. When they were last in government, everything the Labor Party touched on skills was made worse. Apprenticeship numbers took a nosedive. When Labor last left office, apprentice and trainee numbers were in freefall, with the number in training collapsing by 22 per cent. But perhaps the most egregious of Labor's failures was their VET FEE-HELP disaster. Labor's VET FEE-HELP scheme saw the reputation of the Australian skills system hit rock bottom, as tens of thousands of Australians were loaded up with debt for doing courses that would never land them a job. The scheme, established by the Labor government in 2008 and expanded in 2012, was plagued by system-wide rorting, with some training providers exploiting loose rules and charging students substantial debts for training they never undertook or benefited from. It also targeted people with disabilities and substance abuse issues, public housing residents, those from non-English-speaking backgrounds and others, with offers of free laptops and other incentives. In 2014 the Hon. Michael Lavarch, then commissioner responsible for risk, intelligence and regulatory support at the Australian Skills Quality Authority, said of Labor's VET FEE-HELP: I have been in and around public life for a long time. I think I can fairly say that this was the worst piece of public policy I have ever seen. The taxpayer is still picking up the tab for this enormous public policy failure, which is now over $3.5 billion. And who presided over all these failures? None other than the former and now returned Minister for Skills and Training, the member for Gorton. So we hope the powers in this bill might save the minister from himself. The bill is important because it is important we get regulation right in skills, and we are starting to see the impact of Labor's approach. The latest data from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research demonstrates that the Albanese government is overseeing a wholesale collapse in the number of apprentices and trainees in every single state and in almost every electorate across the nation. After just one year of Labor, there are over 50,000 fewer apprentices and trainees in training today than when Labor took office, a loss of one in 10. The data, which has also been broken down by electorate, shows that, in the final year of the coalition government, in-training numbers increased in every electorate bar one, while under the first year of Labor's skills policies the number of apprentices and trainees dropped in every electorate except four. In the Minister for Skills and Training's own electorate, in the last year of the Liberal government, numbers went up by 32 per cent. In his first year in office, he lost 10 per cent of the apprentices and trainees in his community. In the Treasurer's electorate of Rankin, in the final year of the Liberal government, numbers went up 43 per cent. In his first year of office, the Treasurer has overseen a 15 per cent drop in the number of apprentices and trainees in his own community. What was the response from the minister to these worrying drops in numbers? With the dexterity of maybe a newborn giraffe, he backflipped on the long-run narrative Labor have been spinning about the coalition and skills. For nine long years, Labor have clung steadfastly to their fiction that the coalition cut funding from skills. The minister has now decided the real reason Australia lost 50,000 apprentices and trainees in Labor's first year of government is that the coalition was putting too much funding into skills. The member for Gorton actually said the coalition spent $3.8 billion annually to 'prop up' the apprenticeship system. Does he mean 'investing in Australian apprentices and funding skills opportunities for the next generation of Australian workers'? Labor can criticise the coalition either for cutting funding for skills or for overfunding skills, but they can't do both. We will work with the government and with the crossbench to improve this bill and get this policy area right. We handed the Albanese government a skills and training system for not just training up but powering ahead on the back of record investments guaranteed by a strong economy. Our policies invested over $13 billion in skills over the final two years of government alone. We didn't just clean up Labor's mess; we made the most significant reforms to Aussie skills in over a decade. Our policy settings got apprenticeship numbers up to record levels—levels which have now dropped by 10 per cent. We did all of this while saving a generation of Australian workers from the biggest hit to Australia's workforce since the Great Depression. Labor came to power promising it would solve skills shortages and deliver more opportunities for Australians to get into training. But the reality is that they have delivered a collapse in apprenticeship and traineeship starts and in the number of Australians in training. We will do what we can to push them in the right direction. This is just too important for the future of our young people, the future of our training system and the future of our economy. I thank the House. Debate adjourned. Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024 48

Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024

Second Reading 48 16:48 Mr FLETCHER L6B Bradfield I rise to speak on the Crimes Amendment (Strengthening the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence) Bill 2024. This bill amends the Crimes Act to modify rules of evidence and procedure that apply in sexual offences under Commonwealth law and picks up on exposure draft legislation originally developed by the coalition towards the end of the 46th Parliament. It is in the same vein as measures which were first introduced by the Howard government in 2001 to protect children in proceedings for sexual offences and is similar to legislation supported by the coalition in 2013. The bill makes technical and procedural changes to the way in which prosecutions are conducted in the Commonwealth jurisdiction. The bill does not deal with prosecutions under state and territory laws, which govern the majority of cases in which sexual offences come before a court in Australia. At a high level, the bill does four main things. First, it expands the range of offences to which special rules for dealing with sexual offences apply. The expanded list includes offences such as female genital mutilation, intimate image abuse, sexual servitude, crimes against humanity, war crimes, torture and drug offences involving children. Secondly, the bill changes rules of admissibility in relation to sexual reputation and sexual experience. The bill makes inadmissible the experience of a child or vulnerable adult with respect to sexual activities unless a court grants leave and it meets specific criteria. The bill also makes inadmissible evidence of a child's or vulnerable adult's reputation in respect of sexual activities. The third change in the bill is to make procedural orders, allowing a court to make orders allowing a person's evidence about an alleged sexual offence to be recorded at a special evidence recording hearing. It also requires evidence given by a child, vulnerable adult or special witness to be recorded if the evidence is given outside such a hearing. Fourthly, the bill makes clear that the current restriction on publishing material that identifies a person as a child witness, child complainant or vulnerable adult complainant does not apply to self-identifying material. It also streamlines requirements allowing third parties, such as media entities, to identify a vulnerable person with their informed consent. Initial feedback from stakeholders is that these measures are broadly in line with criminal procedure provisions in the various state and territory jurisdictions. However, the bill is technical in nature, and a close analysis is warranted, informed by the expertise of the legal profession. It is highly desirable that the parliament should, before arriving at a final position, allow the legal profession and other stakeholders to provide input through a parliamentary committee process so as to allow the parliament to be satisfied that the bill is well adapted to the problems it seeks to address. I thank the House. Debate adjourned. Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024, Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living—Medicare Levy) Bill 2024 49

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

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

Second Reading 49 16:53 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls Deputy Speaker Vasta, Nicholls is a great electorate. You're always welcome there, as I said to the Speaker last night. This is like a riveting movie that's just had a bit of a 24-hour intermission, but I look forward to continuing on. As I was saying last night, much has been said about the government tax cuts. I've seen ministers rise up there and say that people were getting zero under the coalition and they're getting a various range of tax cuts under those opposite. It ignores the fact that there was a low- and middle-income tax offset that was giving $1,500 to lower- and middle-income earners. They got a rude shock when they went to get their tax returns last year and found out that the low- and middle-income tax offset was no longer there. Now, we're talking about what measures could have been undertaken by the government, and keeping the low- and middle-income tax offset would have actually given most of the taxpayers more money and kept the integrity of the stage 3 tax cuts and the attempt to get bracket creep under control. So there were options, and obviously the one they chose was the complete change of the tax reform, breaking an election promise. The coalition is committed to lower, simpler and fairer taxes, which is why we will not oppose the reduction in the tax rate. But the Prime Minister's broken promise means that delivering the stage 3 tax reforms as they were intended and legislated is now impossible. These were stage 3 tax reforms that, I might remind people, came on top of stage 1 and 2—that's been forgotten—and that were voted for, agreed to and promised several times by the then opposition in the lead-up to the election. The coalition is committed to going to the next election with a tax reform package—we have to look at tax reform again—that is in keeping with the intent of the stage 3 tax reforms. We remain committed to fighting bracket creep and enshrining aspiration. Our package will be fully costed and ready to implement. It will deliver lower, simpler and fairer taxes, fight bracket creep, reward hard work and support a strong economy where every Australian can get ahead. Australians are finding it really difficult to get ahead at the moment because of the cost-of-living crisis. The purchasing power of an Australian earning a gross salary of $85,000 has fallen more than $7,600 since Labor came to office, so their purchasing power has been smashed, but the ministers are jumping up saying: 'Here's 800 bucks. Aren't I a hero?' For an average income, that is a loss of just under $8,000, and it's swallowed up by rising mortgage payments, falling real wages and increasing taxes. An earner on this annual wage would receive just $804 more under Labour's policy, or $15.46 a week. That's not even including the low- and middle-income tax scheme that I discussed earlier. Over time, the bracket creep this policy entrenches will increase taxes by $28 billion on more than four million Australians, so the sugar hit is now but the long-term tax take for the government, out of Australians' pockets, is significant. The cost-of-living crisis is real, and the government's got to do more than just offer a tax cut. The cost-of-living crisis is caused by policies that do not promote productivity, business success and profitability and that keep inflation at an extremely high rate. Some of those policies are around energy. The government's failed to introduce policies that would enable it to keep its promised $275 reduction in energy bills. The cost of groceries is going up in the supermarket. I come from an agricultural region and an agricultural electorate, and I can tell you why groceries are going up: it's because the policies of the Labor government, particularly around IR, biosecurity and water, are making it extremely difficult to run agricultural businesses and invest in agriculture, because of the uncertainty of the future. That's going to put incredible pressure on what we all need, which is food. As I explained, the industrial relations policies are a direct attack on productivity, and lower productivity leads to higher inflation. The first thing I said last night when I started this speech about this issue was that there were three issues that I wanted to cover. The first is integrity in politics, the second is meaningful tax reform and the third is the cost-of-living crisis. On integrity in politics, as I said, before the election the Prime Minister promised the $275 reduction in energy prices, no change to super tax, cheaper mortgages and no change to the stage 3 tax cuts. All of those promises have been broken. If we're serious about integrity in politics, you've got to go to the election meaning what you say, and you need to do what you said during the campaign if you're lucky enough to get elected. That hasn't happened here. We're not having a conversation about meaningful tax reform. We're having a conversation about redistribution and giving people a bit of a sugar hit to try and help a cost-of-living crisis that the government is exacerbating. When the tax cut sugar hit wears off and any benefit is swallowed up by more bad policy decisions, the wage earners are going to face this terrible reality. They're facing it now. They're worse off. And they don't appreciate being lectured by government ministers during question time telling them how wonderful we are for looking after them by giving them an $800 tax cut, when, overall, they're incredibly worse off due to inflation, interest rates, cost of living and the failure to extend the low- and middle-income tax offset. The government is taxing for its future, not Australia's future. It's taxing for Dunkley, not for the future of Australian productivity. Keating understood that, Hawke understood that and Howard and Costello understood that. It's about time we got back to meaningful tax reform, and I urge the government to focus on that and try and lift productivity and the economic conditions. That will then improve the living standards in Australia, which have been falling since they came to government. 17:01 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo I rise to speak in favour of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 that is before us and against the proposed amendments. In doing so, I want to address a couple of misnomers that have been put around and address some of the facts about bracket creep, about cost-of-living pressures and about the alleged broken promises. First of all, I was here when the original stage 3 tax cuts were legislated. Mr Birrell 288713 Did you vote for them? Ms CHESTERS 249710 I did vote for them, but I was very unhappy to vote for them. Anyone who goes back through Hansard would read that and see that, not just in my speech but also in the many 90-second statements that I made after that. My criticism of the government of the day was that they very much bullied, I believe, the rest of the chamber into supporting them. We tried to split the legislation and we tried to change the legislation so that the stage 3 tax cuts were fairer because we knew, like we know today, that it was unfair that only one group of taxpayers got the bulk benefit of stage 3. The previous speaker mentioned that stage 1 was legislated. Yes, it was, but it was temporary. If the previous government had been genuine about giving low- to middle-income earners genuine tax relief, they would have made that offset permanent at that time, but they didn't; they made it temporary. They legislated that it was temporary, and then it ran out last year. So, while they try to put the blame on us, they weren't really interested in low- and middle- income earners. They let that lapse. They never legislated it. It was temporary in their reforms. We were left with a situation, and it got through. We tried to amend it in the Senate and we tried to amend it in the House when we had stage 3. Fast forward to where we are today, the economic circumstances have changed. We know that there are cost-of-living pressures, and we know that people are doing it tough. We also know from the data that those on the lowest of incomes are the ones that are struggling. That is why I'm so proud to be part of a Labor Party government that said, 'We need to do what is responsible; we need to amend stage 3 and we need to make sure that everybody gets a tax cut on 1 July.' What we are saying to those opposite is that not only are you getting a very generous tax cut but your staff are also getting a tax cut. Rather than getting upwards of $9,000, why don't you share it with your electorate office. That's what we're saying because everybody is feeling the cost-of-living pressures. Everybody is feeling those pressures, and that is why we have changed it so every Australian taxpayer gets a tax cut. That is the proposal. That is the core of what this is. It is saying, 'Share the tax cut and the tax relief with everybody.' Can I just address the furphy that has been put out that this does not deal with bracket creep. The previous stage 3 way of dealing with bracket creep was to abolish a bracket. That's not dealing with bracket creep; that's effectively trying to flatten our tax structure. That is about saying that everybody earning from $45,000 to $200,000 pays the same marginal tax rate. That isn't in the spirit of our progressive tax system. That isn't dealing with bracket creep; that abolishes a bracket. What I respect and applaud in this proposal that is before the House is that it genuinely deals with bracket creep in a fair and transparent way and really supports those on low to middle incomes. It is lowering the tax rate for people earning from $18,200 to $45,000 from 19 per cent to 16 per cent. In the current stage 3 that was legislated by the previous government, they got nothing. Those opposite were saying, 'Oh, you should have done something about it.' Well, we are, in this plan. We are reducing the marginal rate. We're not making it temporary. We're going to permanently reduce their rate from 19 to 16. That is dealing with bracket creep. What we're also doing is lifting the top of the next tier above $45,000. Prior to stage 3 coming in, it was $120,000. We're raising it to $135,000 before you tip into the next bracket. Again, that is dealing with bracket creep—not abolishing the bracket, but doing the sensible and fair thing by lifting the top of that bracket. The next bracket goes from $135,000 up to $190,000. Again, we are lifting the bracket—not abolishing it or collapsing our tax system into virtually a flat system but actually restoring the integrity of the progressive tax system that we have in this country and dealing with bracket creep in a fair way. Above that is the bracket which we, the parliamentarians in this place, sit in, along with about two per cent of taxpayers. We still get a generous tax cut. I had my local paper say, 'Well, what do you say to the 8,000 people in your electorate who earn more than $180,000 and are not going to get as much?' I said, 'You know, they're still going to get a decent, fair and generous cut.' It's still about $4,500. But I'm asking them to think about the people in their community, including the aged-care workers caring for their parents, the early childhood educators caring for their children, the nurses in the hospitals, and the primary and secondary school teachers. If they're on that kind of income, they're likely to have a cleaner and a gardener. I ask them to think about people cleaning their homes and cutting their lawns. I'm asking those in my community to think of their neighbours and about the person selling them their coffee or their groceries. That is what is so vital about the plan that's before us: it delivers tax relief to all workers, regardless of their occupation. Regardless of what income they are on, everybody gets a benefit from this tax cut. The other furphy out there is this idea that, if you are on a income of less than $180,000, you don't have aspirations. It is such nonsense. It is snobbery. I think about all the very hardworking community sector workers in my electorate, the people who didn't go for a high-flying corporate job—of which there aren't too many in my electorate, I should say—but instead studied social work at university or are working in disability support work. I think about our social workers, the men and women who are working on the front line of our housing crisis or in the community not-for-profit sector. I think about our financial counsellors and the aspirations that they have, not just for their own careers but for our community. I am so relieved, and I can look them in the face now knowing that on 1 July they're going to share in this tax cut and get a decent tax cut too, because they deserve it. They work super hard, full time. They have such a critical job to do at the moment. They deserve a tax cut. Under those opposite, they would have got nil or little. What we're saying to them is: we recognise your worth and the value of your work, and we are giving you support in these tax cuts. The other part that is so critical about the tax reforms before us is that they relieve a little bit of the pressure off our small businesses. They know that their workers are going to get some tax relief from 1 July. It helps keep their good workers in the jobs they have if they know that they get a little bit of tax relief. They know that their workers are going to get that little bit extra in their pocket every pay cycle coming through. That pressure is being relieved in the workplace, where people, particularly those on low and middle incomes, are a bit worried. My electorate is a regional electorate, and we've seen from the data that the regional electorates will do overwhelmingly better under this reform. Why? Our incomes are smaller. By population, spread across our region, the average income is less. The other group that we know will do exceptionally well under this reform, and for whom fairness is being returned, is young people—people starting out their careers or working in insecure part-time casual jobs. Whether they're studying at university or building their career, young people are on smaller incomes and will benefit overwhelmingly from our fairer tax plan. So rural Australia will be better off under this plan, women will be better off under this plan and younger workers will be better off under this plan. The people who hold up our community and work super hard to make sure it continues to function, including our truckies, cleaners, retail workers, hospitality workers, nurses and teachers—all those people who we said were the heroes of the pandemic—will get a fair tax cut under this reform, as will the community sector workers I talked about. There's a reason why during question time we can go to every member of our frontbench and ask them a question about how the workers in their sector will do, because every taxpayer will benefit under this. I'm not surprised that those opposite are turning their noses up. I'd say it's a little bit of self-interest. Yes, we're asking you to share your tax cut with people in your community—with your own staff, your neighbours, the person who sells you coffee or groceries, the person who cares for your parents in aged care and the person who might care for or teach your children. That's what makes our country stronger. Yes, we acknowledge that the economic circumstances have changed, and that's why we have changed stage 3—and in the nick of time. We need to get this through the parliament so it's in place for 1 July. This is just one of the many measures that our government is taking to help tackle the cost of living and the pressures people are feeling. What is most important about this reform is that we know from the Reserve Bank that it's not going to have an impact on inflation and is not going to force inflation up. What is also critical about this reform, and where I want to commend the Treasurer and the Prime Minister, is that they've got the timing right, the politics right and the policy right. That's why so many Australians get it. As to this idea that it's a broken promise, just keep saying that, because out there in the community all people hear is: 'The Prime Minister is going to get less of a tax cut and he's going to share it with me. That's a pretty good bloke. I don't mind that.' That's what we're saying. A responsible Prime Minister and government said: 'The economic circumstances have changed. We need to share this because lots of others need that support.' That is generosity, fairness and the right economic plan, and people out in the community recognise that. That's why they're saying that they agree with this. Regardless of how they vote or their political colour, people across the board recognise that this is a good deal. I know this from the people who've spoken to me in my community, including self-funded retirees saying how great this is for their grandkids and how it's really going to help their grandkids pay for their rent or pay for their car or get themselves up and going. There is concern about how young people get a start. They see this as a real boost for young people. Similarly, for people who are working really hard and saying, 'I just can't work any harder, yet I can't meet my bills,' this will help them get that little bit further. Knowing that on 1 July everyone in my community is going to get a little bit extra in their pocket to help pay their bills is a good thing. Around 88 per cent of the taxpayers in my electorate will receive a bigger and fairer tax cut because of these changes. The average tax cut across my electorate will be about $1,400 from 1 July. That's around 66,000 taxpayers in my electorate who will receive a tax break. Every single taxpayer in my electorate will get one. That is the power of this change. And not just in my electorate, but in all electorates. You cannot get past the fact that this delivers for everybody. It is the right thing to do. I'd encourage those opposite to stop being so negative about it. You're voting for it, so embrace it. You're being really disingenuous going back to your electorates and saying: 'Yes; I voted for it. I'm glad you're getting a little bit extra, but I didn't really like it. I didn't really support it. We're going to go back and do more.' Don't. Just be proud to be here in this parliament and support good economic policy that delivers fairness, restores integrity to our tax system and makes sure that every taxpayer gets some tax relief on 1 July. 17:16 Mr BANDT M3C Melbourne Labor's answer to the cost-of-living crisis is to give every politician a $4,500 a year tax cut while asking middle-income earners to accept an extra $15 a week—$4,500 a year for every politician and billionaire and wealthy person in this country, while asking average Australians to put up with one-third of that. Three times as much of the tax cut is going to those at the top than to those in the middle. Eighty billion dollars is how much Labor is spending on giving tax cuts to politicians, billionaires and the wealthiest in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis. Eighty billion dollars would pretty much pay to get dental into Medicare so that everyone in the country—not just the politicians and the wealthy few, but everyone in the country—could get the health care they need because you'd be able to go the dentist and use your Medicare card. Many people are skipping on essentials like getting the care they need, like getting the medical care they need, like going to the dentist, because they simply can't afford it. So Labor had a choice on how best to spend over $300 billion. And do you know what they did? They took $80 billion of it and they didn't use it to put dental into Medicare or to wipe student debt or to help people who are doing it tough, who get nothing because they're on JobSeeker. No; Labor have chosen to spend $80 billion on giving tax cuts to politicians and billionaires. Under Labor's package, the wealthiest 20 per cent of society get 50 per cent of the money in their revised stage 3 cuts. I'll just say that again: the wealthiest 20 per cent get 50 per cent of the more than $300 billion cost of this legislation. The poorest 20 per cent get 0.4 per cent of the money. That's Labor's idea of fairness. And they justify it by saying, 'It's not as bad as what the previous mob did.' Well, by this stage of the game the Australian population, in the middle of Labor's housing and rental crisis and a massive cost-of-living crisis, is entitled to expect a bit more of the government than to be a little bit less crap than the last mob. Right? If you're going to come back and look at how to deal with a cost-of-living crisis and Labor's housing and rental crisis, then do something that will actually make a huge difference for people. An extra $15 a week for middle-income earners is what Labor is asking people to be satisfied with, but average rents have gone up nearly $100 a week under Labor's housing and rental crisis, and average mortgages have gone up nearly $200 a week. And so Labor can find $4,500 a year for politician, but only an $15 a week for people whose rent has gone up by $100 or whose mortgage has gone up by $200. That is not fairness; that is asking people to continue to suffer through a cost-of-living crisis instead of taking the reins and saying, 'We're going to deal with it.' With over $300 billion, imagine the things that you could do. You could put dental into Medicare, make child care free and wipe student debt—things that would last for people and wouldn't be swallowed up by another unfair rent rise from the landlord, because Labor backs unlimited rent rises. It wouldn't be swallowed up by mortgages continuing to go through the roof, because house prices are going up, because Labor won't unwind negative gearing or capital gains tax concessions. There are many people who will say, 'Yes, a bit of money is welcome,' but wouldn't it be better to take action on soaring rents, house prices and mortgages? Wouldn't it be better to do that? Wouldn't it be better to get dental into Medicare instead of giving Clive Palmer and Gina Rinehart a $4½ thousand a year tax cut? Labor still has not made the case about why the top tax bracket deserve a $4½ thousand a year tax cut at all. People at the top are doing okay. It is people on the low and middle incomes who are struggling, and that is where the help should go. There are a lot of people in Labor's package who get nothing. If you're on income support, your rent and the cost of groceries have gone up, but you don't get a cent out of this $300-odd billion, if that's what you're totally relying on. Mr Laxale 299174 There's rent assistance. Mr BANDT M3C And they interject and say, 'What about Commonwealth rent assistance?' If you're part of the huge number of people in private rental who don't get rent assistance, you've got nothing. That's Labor's answer to the rental crisis. They back unlimited rent increases. Mr Laxale 299174 We've pushed it up. Mr BANDT M3C They've increased Commonwealth rent assistance by about one per cent for some people, and rents have gone up about 10 times as much as they've increased Commonwealth rent assistance. Government members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! The member for Melbourne has the call. Mr BANDT M3C Labor is simply too gutless to take on the big corporations and property developers, and, as a result, rents are going up, the cost of living is going up, and renters are being pushed to the brink. Renters and first homebuyers are losing out in auctions to property investors. Every weekend, in every neighbourhood, on nature strips right around the country, hopeful renters tap out as wealthy property investors push prices into the stratosphere, well beyond what people on normal incomes can afford. Property investors win, because they've got one weird trick: they get massive tax handouts from the Labor government. That's right—not only do property investors make eye-watering sums from rental incomes through soaring rents, they also get tax handouts from Labor. That's public money from the government that they get to put in their pockets. Meanwhile, renters are dealing with unlimited rent increases and struggling to save for a first home. When renters try to buy their first home, they're getting outbid by these property investors. Let me tell you something about this tax trick: it's not available to renters. It's not available to everyday people. It's available to only property investors. Seventy-five per cent of Labor politicians in this place are property investors. Sixty-four per cent of coalition politicians are property investors. They get the tax handouts if they negatively gear. When Labor and the Liberals vote against the Greens to keep negative gearing and capital gains tax handouts— Government members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER E0D Order! The member for Melbourne has the call. Mr M3C they're voting for their own tax handouts. They're voting for their own personal cash cow property portfolios. Gore Vidal once said: There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. While Labor and the Liberals hold hands and defend these tax handouts for property investors, the same could be said here in Australia. We have the party of property moguls here in Australia, and the Greens are taking them on. Negative gearing hands billions of dollars to property investors and locks renters and first homebuyers out. The Greens will not stand by and allow Labor to make this rental and housing crisis worse. The system is stacked against renters and first homebuyers, but we can fix it. We know pressure works, and the Greens will use our power in this parliament to keep fighting. Labor shifted on the stage 3 tax cuts because pressure was brought to bear and they finally could not admit any more that it was unfair. If Labor can shift on stage 3 tax cuts, they can shift on negative gearing and on the massive tax handouts that go to property investors. All that these tax handouts—billions of dollars of public money every year—do is push house prices out of reach of renters and first-time buyers. Renters turn up to auctions to bid and they bid with what they can afford but next to them is a wealthy property investor getting a tax handout from the Labor government who can just keep bidding and bidding. At the end of the day, if developers bid too much, they write it off as a tax loss and get a tax handout from the government. Then, a few years later, as another continuation of the rort, they get to sell the property and they only pay half the tax on it; they get another tax handout at that stage as well. That's why here in this country Australia some people are struggling to buy their first home, but Labor is giving tax handouts to people who have five to buy their sixth, seventh and eighth. All that does is push housing prices out of reach of people and push up rents, and the housing prices continue to get worse. We have an opportunity here in this parliament to fix the housing and rental crisis to stop billions of dollars of handouts being given to property investors that lock millions of renters out of the chance of owning their own homes. We can say, 'Stop giving tax cuts to politicians and billionaires and instead use that money to do things like fund a rent freeze or to build more public housing or get dental into Medicare or make child care free.' With a bit of guts in this place, we could stop all the billions of dollars that are going to the property moguls, billionaires and the big corporations and use it to make everyday people's lives better. So, Labor, if you can shift on stage 3 tax cuts then do the right thing and shift on negative gearing and capital gains tax as well. Because, otherwise, generations are going to be locked out of having a home. Parents are worried not only about their kids ever being able to own a home but now also about being able to rent near where you work or study. Labor just does not get how bad the housing and rental crisis is. They come to this parliament with band-aid solutions. Band-aids won't fix the bullet holes that are in our housing and our rental systems, that are pushing affordable homes out of the reach of generations. It's happening across the age spectrum—young people, old people. Under this government, you can find yourself, even after doing all the right things—going to TAFE, going to university, studying, working hard, saving, everything that is asked of you—still unable to afford a home. Grocery prices keep going up and the government don't rein them in. Electricity prices keep going up, the corporations make billions of dollars of profits, but they won't tax them and make them pay their fair share. Our society is going down the road to becoming a US style unequal society, where you can do the right thing, do everything that is asked of you, and still not have enough to make ends meet. That is wrong because we are a wealthy country and, in a wealthy country like ours, everybody should be able to afford a house. You shouldn't have to win a lottery to afford a home, as Labor's plan wants you to do. Labor comes in with a plan that says they will help 0.2 per cent of first home buyers with a small help for their deposit and the other 99.8 per cent will just watch house prices going up. In a wealthy country like Australia, you shouldn't have to win a lottery to have an affordable home. Everyone should be able to afford food. Everybody should be able to afford a roof over their head. You shouldn't have to skip meals or skip going to the dentist or skip going to the doctor because you are struggling to pay the rent or the mortgage, while billionaires and big corporations laugh all the way to the bank. It's time that this parliament started acting in the public interest and not for the private interests of the property investors in this place who sit on huge property portfolios that most people in this country will never, ever see. It is time we started putting the public first. This bill says that politicians and billionaires should get tax cuts three times the size of those given to everyday people. Well, the Greens think there's a different way. If we're going to spend $300-odd billion, do it in a way that lifts people out of poverty; do it in a way that doesn't put the politicians and billionaires first but puts everyday people first. It is time to start putting the public interest, not vested interests, first. 17:30 Mr LAXALE 299174 Bennelong There's no denying that cost-of-living pressures have been at the forefront of people's minds across my electorate of Bennelong and across Australia as a whole. From families struggling to make ends meet to individuals who are feeling the pinch of rising prices of everyday essentials, cost-of-living pressures have hurt household budgets. Our government was elected to clean up the mess left by those opposite and to deliver genuine cost-of-living relief to all Australians. With Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts, we are doing just that. We are a government that recognises that people are doing it tough. That's why, since day one, the No. 1 priority of this government has been to address pressing challenges of inflation and to deliver cost-of-living relief. It's what we were elected to do. We know that many people are doing it tough. That's why in the last budget we delivered $23 billion of targeted relief whilst implementing fiscal policy that did not add to the burden of inflation. From electricity bill relief to making essential medicines more affordable, from reducing the costs of accessing medical care to expanding parental leave and making child care more affordable, our government is committed to delivering genuine relief to everyday Australians. But we know that household budgets are still tight, that global economic pressures continue to impact the Australian economy and that people need more support. When Morrison's stage 3 tax cuts were legislated five years ago the world was a very different place: 2019 was before a global pandemic; it was before persistent inflation, of which the highest quarter on record happened under the former government; 2019 was before higher interest rates, which we also know started under the former government; and 2019 was well before two global conflicts and the continued post-pandemic supply chain shocks that we still face today. Our economy in 2024 is vastly different to the economy of 2019. When economic circumstances change, economic policy must also change. This should not be a controversial statement. It should be how good governments respond to the challenges of the time. Our cost-of-living tax cuts represent good economic policy that respond to the economic challenges of today. But they aren't just about cost of living. They are about restoring fairness to the tax system to serve the interests of middle Australia in a better way at a time they need it most. While the Morrison plan was to give a tax cut to only some, Labor's plan is to give a cut to every taxpayer. Reshaping this plan will mean that 11.5 million taxpayers will receive a bigger tax cut. That means that 5.8 million women will receive a bigger tax cut. In Bennelong alone, every single one of our 92,000 taxpayers will receive cost-of-living relief through a tax cut, and 74,000 people in Bennelong will be better off than under the Liberals. A nurse who is earning around $90,000 a year will receive a tax cut of $1,929. That's $804 a year better off under Labor's plan. A software engineer earning $140,000 a year will get a tax cut of $3,729. That's $500 more a year than under the Morrison plan. And a part-time office assistant who is earning $45,000 a year will get a tax cut of $804, whereas under the Liberals they would have got zero—zip, nothing. Where Australian households are looking at how to make every dollar count, Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts will provide help at a really tough time. But the benefits of these cuts extend far beyond just the individual. Our plan restores the progressive nature of our tax system. Our country's social safety net has been built on a backbone of progressive income tax, and the Liberals wanted to smash that. They wanted someone on $45,000 a year to pay the same rate of tax as someone on $200,000 a year. Their plan is and always has been unfair. Labor's plan is better and fairer. It will ensure that every taxpayer receives a tax cut. By dropping two tax rates and lifting two tax thresholds, we are ensuring that every Australian taxpayer receives a benefit. This is about addressing cost-of-living pressures in a way that is equitable and sustainable. We are putting more money back into the pockets of working Australians. We are the government that wants every Australian worker to earn more and to keep more of what they earn. Contrast that to the Liberals and Nationals, who want you to work longer for less. Contrast our clarity over this policy to the Liberals and Nationals, who have tied themselves in knots over their response to our better and fairer cost-of-living tax cut changes. First, the Liberals said they would oppose the policy. Then they said they'd roll it back. Then the alternative Treasurer of this country, the member for Hume, on the same day he indicated he would support it, called it Marxism. Of course, the Leader of the Opposition said that there should be an election on this issue. Then he, too, said he would support it. I will gladly take our economic record to the next election and defend to the hilt these better and fairer tax cuts. Prior to the last election the shadow Treasurer came to Bennelong, campaigning alongside the Liberal's hand-picked parachute candidate. So, at the next election, I challenge the shadow Treasurer to come back to Bennelong again, alongside the next Liberal out-of-town parachute candidate, and explain why the Liberals have attacked Labor's cost-of-living tax cuts. Come and explain why the Liberals didn't want to deliver bigger tax cuts for 81 per cent of taxpayers in Bennelong. Come and explain why the Liberals didn't want a part-time worker on $45,000 a year to get a tax cut, as they will under Labor's plan. I know that, whatever it is they'll be selling, it won't be what our community have been asking for. Bennelong asked me to fight for changes to block Morrison's tax cuts, and they asked for more help with cost-of-living pressures. On behalf of them, I fought for the changes we see here today in this legislation. So, on behalf of Bennelong, I thank the Treasurer, the Prime Minister, the cabinet and the entire Labor caucus for listening to us. There is, of course, much more work to do but, with our cost-of-living support and with these cost-of-living tax cuts, we are showing that we are a government that wants you to earn more and to keep more of what you earn. I commend this bill to the House. 17:38 Mr CHESTER IPZ Gippsland We all remember that the Prime Minister came to office promising honesty and transparency. These are the words he used: my word is my bond. In the last few weeks the people of Australia have seen just how much this Prime Minister's word is actually worth. The legislation before us today is proof that, when the Prime Minister says, 'My word is my bond,' he doesn't actually mean it. He doesn't mean he's actually going to keep his word. It's important to reflect on how we got to where we are today with the stage 3 tax cuts. How did we get to this point? Much of the media coverage over the last couple of weeks has quite conveniently missed a very important point: you only get to stage 3 of the tax cuts after you have had stage 1 and stage 2 of the legislated stage 1, stage 2 and stage 3 tax cuts. The coalition, when in government, was committed, and remains committed, to delivering lower, fairer and simpler taxes to the Australian people. We believe Australians work hard for their money, and they get to keep as much as we possibly can let them keep, while we still provide the services and critical infrastructure the government needs to provide on behalf of the population. So we do believe in lower, fairer and simpler taxes in this nation. The irony is while in opposition the Labor Party agreed with us. The Labor Party agreed with stage 1, stage 2 and stage 3 tax cuts. In fact they agreed with us all the way up until the day they didn't. It is quite extraordinary set of circumstances. Mr Rae 300122 Do you agree with us, Darren? Mr CHESTER IPZ My good friend the member for Hawke, we had a little chat on TV yesterday together. We can revisit the whole conversation, but we will get to that as the evening proceeds. We are teetering, in this place, on the very edge of credibility when the Prime Minister and the Treasurer come to the dispatch box and say to the Australian people, 'You know what? We had no plans to change stage 3. It wasn't even our idea. It was Treasury, the department, that initiated the whole thing last December. Up until then we were going to go ahead with stage 1, stage 2 and stage 3. It wasn't even our idea.' What they're saying to us is that the secretary of the Treasury, on his own volition, went on a little multibillion-dollar frolic last December, pooled all the resources of his department and came up with a new idea for stage 3 tax cuts without telling the Treasurer and without telling the Prime Minister. We are teetering on the very edge of credibility. As someone who has had the great fortune of being a minister on a couple of occasions I can assure you the secretary of the department does not go out on a multibillion-dollar frolic on their own without first checking the temperature of the minister for the portfolio. It is beyond credibility that the secretary of the Department of Treasury would cook up this whole change to the tax system without even once saying, 'Hey Treasurer, what you think about this? Prime Minister, what do you reckon?'—'No, I'll just go and do this all by myself. I'll tie up hundreds of staff in thousands of hours of work on a new policy area involving billions of dollars, but don't tell the Treasurer. Shh, it's a secret. It's a little Christmas present for Jimbo. Don't tell anyone. Don't pass it on.' If I were to describe my attitude to the Treasurer and the Prime Minister coming to the dispatch box and saying that the Treasury initiated the whole thing, I'd say I'm a little bit sceptical—just a little bit sceptical. I'm going to commentate for a moment, which is a dangerous thing for a politician to do, and reflect on the decision of the Prime Minister over the Christmas break to decide that, while his word is his bond, it doesn't really mean anything in this case. I'd suggest that not all gamblers can be found at the casino. The Prime Minister has taken the biggest gamble I've seen any leader make in this place in the past 15 years. The gamble the Prime Minister has been prepared to take is that in trashing his own word, trashing his own integrity and trashing his own honesty he thinks the Australian people are going to forget about it because they're getting a little bit more in their pockets. They're going to be so kind to the Prime Minister that, even though they've been misled, deceived, told mistruths, for $15 a week—that $15 worth of pizza might be half a family sized pizza per week—for the price of half a family sized pizza per week, they're going to forgive him for breaking his word. That's a hell of a gamble for a Prime Minister to take when the next election will be very much about, 'Whom do you trust?' I've heard those opposite speaking today, and I'll be interested to hear more of the debate tonight. If those opposite are so confident, are so passionate and are so determined that they are right, that their stage 3 tax cuts are better than the ones already legislated, why didn't they tell the Australian people? Why didn't they tell the Australian people at the last election? Why try and win the election based on a lie, based on deception? Why not tell the truth at the election and let the Australian people make their own choice? Funnily enough, that's how democracy works. You go to the Australian people, you go to your electorate and you go to the people in your community, you present your policies and present your ideas, you're upfront with them and then they get to cast their vote. If those opposite are suddenly so confident that their approach was the right approach all along, why didn't they take it to the Australian people and let them vote on it? If we do accept the explanation of the Prime Minister and the Treasurer that this whole idea was the idea of the bureaucrats at Treasury, why should we believe the Prime Minister and the Treasurer when they stand at the dispatch box now and say: 'We're not going to touch negative gearing. Oh, no, we're not going to touch a tax on the family home.' If they didn't know about Treasury changing the entire stage 3 tax system, how would they know if the Treasury is out there doing it again? They could be out there cooking up more tax reform: negative gearing, tax on the family home, capital gains—who knows? If the Prime Minister's word is his bond and this was his policy until it wasn't and he didn't know about Treasury doing the last bit of work, how would he know? Who is actually running Treasury? Who is running the finances of this government? Is it the Treasurer, is it the Prime Minister, or is it the bureaucrats, who apparently go off on multibillion dollar frolics and only tell the Prime Minister and the Treasurer when it suits them and when it's convenient? So, when it's convenient, maybe the Treasury will tell us whether they are working on negative gearing or on capital gains tax on the family home. Those opposite wouldn't know. They weren't even told last time, so how would they know what Treasury's cooking up next. As I said, it is on the very edge of credibility to suggest for even a moment that the Treasurer and the Prime Minister didn't know about these changes. I will make one other point in terms of the failings of this government when it comes to regional Australia. It has been in government for almost two years. In that time, the taxes gathered by this government have not led to a single major infrastructure project being planned, funded or delivered in my seat of Gippsland. If you see a bulldozer, a grader, a crane or an excavator on a major project anywhere in Gippsland today, I can assure you of one thing: this government had absolutely nothing to do with it. Gippslanders need a fairer share of their taxes being returned to our community and our region for the services and infrastructure we need. I want to raise one project tonight which I am anxious for the minister for infrastructure and transport to take some interest in. I presented the case to her in the past. It is the Traralgon bypass on the Princes Highway. The Traralgon bypass is a project that's been talked about for the best part of 30 years. I accept it's primarily a state government responsibility to get the project moving, but it will be the federal government that has to provide up to 80 per cent of the funding for that project. It will deliver major social, economic and environmental benefits to my community, reduce congestion in Traralgon and also improve road safety. The Traralgon bypass is the highest priority transport infrastructure project east of Melbourne today. Under the previous government, we were successful in securing 80 per cent of the funding for the Traralgon to Sale duplication project, with 20 per cent of the funding coming from the state government. What concerns me when we talk about the application of our taxes for the benefit of the Australian people is that the minister for transport has indicated that, under the infrastructure review she has undertaken, she is abandoning the 80-20 funding split for regional projects. If you abandon the 80-20 funding split for regional projects, there is not a hope the Victorian government will come on board and fund these projects fifty-fifty. There's just not a hope, so we need to see major projects in regional areas still being able to access 80 per cent of their funding from the Commonwealth and 20 per cent from the states. The previous government allocated a billion dollars of Australian taxpayers' money for the Princes Highway corridor works from Sydney to Adelaide. I have repeatedly sought advice from the minister as to whether taxes which are gathered from Gippslanders will ever make it back onto the roads of Gippsland. I've repeatedly sought the advice of the minister as to what's left of Victoria's share of that $300 million. What's left and how can we prioritise action in my community? As the government forms its budget, we need to see a commitment to fully design and develop the business case to give us some certainty on the route regarding the Traralgon bypass. We need to stop talking about it and we need to actually get on with the job of building projects like that with Australian taxpayers' money. Australians deserve better, and they certainly expect more, than a Prime Minister who says one thing before the election and does the complete opposite after the election. The Prime Minister repeatedly said, up to 100 times, that he had no plans to change the stage 3 tax cuts. As I said earlier, the coalition is committed to lower, simpler and fairer taxes, which is why will not oppose the reduction in the 19c tax rate to 16c. But the Prime Minister's broken promise means that delivering the stage 3 tax reforms, which had been legislated and supported by those opposite, is now simply impossible. We are committed to go to the next election with a tax reform package that is in keeping with the stage 3 tax reforms. Unlike those opposite, we remain committed to fighting bracket creep—that thief in the night that takes more Australian taxpayer dollars than any other form of government legislation and sneaks up on Australians, takes more money out of their pockets and no-one knows about it—and we are committed to enshrining aspiration. We on this side of the House believe—and those opposite used to believe—that strong leaders actually keep their promises even when it is hard to do so. We will take a policy to the next election which delivers lower, simpler and fairer taxes. We will fight bracket creep and we will reward hardworking Australians. What we won't do is what we have seen here in this place over the last couple of weeks. We won't go to the Australian people as a small target and hide the truth simply to win an election, as the Prime Minister did when, all along, he intended to break a promise. That is not how our democracy is meant to function. That is not how the Australian people expect their leaders to behave. I say to those opposite: if you are such strong believers in honesty and transparency, why didn't you have the decency to go to your electorates and argue your case for this tax package before the election? Why did you commit this extraordinary deceit upon the Australian people? When will those opposite tell the truth about their plans to attack negative gearing and to attack the family home with increased taxes? If we couldn't believe you on stage 3 legislated tax cuts, why would be believe you when it comes negative gearing and the family home? 17:52 Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Bean I rise to speak in favour of the substantive bill. It has not always been particularly clear during the course of this debate what the position is of those opposite. If you actually went on the content of their speeches, you would assume that maybe they will oppose the bill. In the case of the previous speaker, we had what seemed to be a mixture of speculative fiction and a bit of a frolic down country roads, which didn't seem to be entirely relevant. Mr Rae 300122 Lots of potholes. Mr DAVID SMITH 276714 Yes, lots of potholes; that's true. We even get them down in Tuggeranong as well. If the substantive bill passes, from 1 July this year, the Albanese Labor government will deliver a tax cut for every taxpayer in my electorate of Bean and across the country. That is what we will deliver. That's what the outcome will be with the passage of this bill. This government understands that the post-COVID global economy is not what we thought it would be five years ago. Taxpayers in Bean have endured a multifaceted cost-of-living crisis, and I believe they deserve a tax cut. When the member for Cook's tax plan was legislated five years ago, it did not factor in a global pandemic, a global inflation spike, successive interest rate rises and greater global uncertainty and it did not do enough to help those who have been put under the most pressure by the changing circumstances. When the circumstances change, changing policy is the responsible thing to do. No matter who you are, this Albanese Labor government will make sure you pay less tax. We understand that family budgets are under pressure right now. Taking that pressure off family budgets is our No. 1 priority. In the ACT, 79 per cent of taxpayers will be better off, and locally in my electorate of Bean, the best part of the ACT, as well as Norfolk Island, 83 per cent of taxpayers will benefit from these changes. Of these taxpayers, I think of the hardworking retail worker at South.Point shopping centre in Tuggeranong, who, after deciding to increase their hours, now earns $30,000. Under the previous tax package, this retail worker would have paid $1,942 in income tax. Under our plan, they'll now receive a tax cut of $354. In addition to getting this tax cut, that retail worker will also benefit by $172 from the increase to the Medicare levy low-income threshold. I also think of the primary school teacher in Bean working at St Clare of Assisi Primary School in Lanyon, earning $85,000 per year. That teacher will get a tax cut of $1,800 per year come 1 July. And I think of the electrician working on construction sites across Denman Prospect in the Molonglo Valley, earning $110,000 per year. They'll now get a tax cut of more than $2,400 a year. And I think of the software engineer working at Services Australia—and pity the software engineers working at Services Australia, with all the work they have to do because of the messes that they're cleaning up!—just next to my electorate office in Greenway, down in Tuggeranong, on more than $140,000. They will now get a tax cut of $3,700. And I think of the nurse working at Uniting Aged Care in Gordon, who'll now get an additional $1,500 tax cut, in addition to the great work of this government in increasing minimum pay right cross aged care last year. I think of the family in the Molonglo Valley on an average household income of around $130,000, with one partner working in the Public Service and earning $80,000 per year and the other working with a local business and earning $50,000 per year. 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. Practically, this tax relief means fuel for the car or more money for household bills. For many others it may simply mean that these good residents of Bean will have that extra bit of breathing room in their weekly budget. The Treasurer made clear last week when he introduced this legislation that these tax cuts are about supporting the hardworking people who make our economy and our country strong. They are about supporting people who work hard so that they can provide for their loved ones and get ahead. They are about doing more than just acknowledging that people are under pressure. They are about recognising that aspiration in this country is not and should not be limited to people who are already doing pretty well. Middle Australia is aspirational Australia, where people work hard to give their kids a better chance. Labor believes that whether you earn 40 grand, 140 grand or 240 grand you deserve a tax cut on 1 July, and that's what we'll be delivering on 1 July this year. But the opposition have given up on being a credible alternative government. The Liberals and Nationals have made it clear that they do not want these tax cuts for middle Australia. You've heard it through most of their speeches. But, to be fair, they think they are middle Australia. So, it's not a surprise that they see anything below that as undeserving of tax cuts. The member for Fraser immediately denounced support for middle Australia and committed to repealing it. They have consistently, over the last 12 months, responded to cost-of-living measures with one word: 'No'. They've given up pretending to care about delivering responsible cost-of-living support for families in Bean and right across the country. While those opposite are working out who plays who in the next series of Nemesis, we on this side of the parliament have rolled out electricity bill relief, cheaper child care, increased rent assistance and cheaper medicines. We've boosted income support payments. We've provided thousands of fee-free TAFE places in this region and around the country. We're building more affordable homes. We're expanding paid parental leave. We're creating jobs and we're getting wages moving again in workplaces where workers are finally getting their rights back into the right balance again. Now, to add to that, we will be the party in government to add providing every Australian with a tax cut to that growing list of cost-of-living measures. Under Labor, more people are working and more people are earning more. And under our plan, more people will keep more of what they earn. I stand here proud to be part of a government that is delivering real cost-of-living relief to families in my community. We're happy to respond when the circumstances demand it, providing support to every community right across the country. I commend this bill to the House. 18:00 Dr SCAMPS 299623 Mackellar Overwhelmingly, economists, civil society and academics have expressed support for the changes to the stage 3 tax cuts that were legislated by the former coalition government over five years ago. And it's not only experts that support the changes. A Newspoll found that 62 per cent of Australians also believe that the government did the right thing in reworking the tax cuts. The strong support for the changes, as illustrated by these statistics, is certainly interesting in view of the wider integrity issue that surrounded the Albanese government's decision to alter the tax cuts, despite promises to pass it on both before the election and since. Changing the stage 3 tax cuts did raise a serious ethical conundrum for the government. They had to weigh up whether to go back on an election promise or relentlessly pursue a set of reforms that were no longer appropriate in the much-altered economic context compared to when the tax reforms were devised five years ago, prior to the pandemic. To proceed with the stage 3 tax cuts unaltered would have been to turn a blind eye to the millions of Australians across the country who are struggling right now to simply make ends meet. In considering the ethical conundrum the PM faced, it is worth reflecting on the depth of the current cost-of-living crisis in this country. According to Dr Ana Gamarra Rondinel from the Faculty of Business and Economics at the University of Melbourne, just before Christmas around 56 per cent of Australians were only just making ends meet or were failing to manage that at all. Over 40 per cent of single parents and people aged between 18 and 24 were reporting high levels of food insecurity. And 12 per cent of women were both eating less and skipping meals to save money. These cost-of-living pressures often compound to reinforce intergenerational poverty, making it harder for people to climb out of hardship. A study last March into poverty in Australia, conducted by the Australian Council of Social Services and the University of New South Wales, found that 12.5 per cent of Australians live in poverty, including 17 per cent of children; 60 per cent of households reliant on JobSeeker live in poverty; 53 per cent of public housing tenants live in poverty; 34 per cent of sole parents live in poverty; and 25 per cent of people with a disability live in poverty. And this study was conducted before the cost-of-living crisis really hit. Inequality is a growing and serious problem in this country, and the longer we take to address it, the wider the gap and the more entrenched it will become. So what benefits do the tax changes bring? The crux for me is that people with taxable incomes of less than $146,000, or nearly 90 per cent of all taxpayers, will either get the same or a larger tax cut under the new plan. At the same time, the 10 per cent of people who earn over $200,000 a year will get smaller tax cuts than under the original stage 3, but, importantly, they will still get a significant tax cut. Their tax cuts start at around $4,500 a year and increase proportionately above $200,000. These are the overall figures, but it's also important to dig a little deeper. The majority of people who earn under $75,000 are women, but women only make up 30 per cent of the people who earn over $170,000 a year. This means that, under the government's changes, women will earn an average tax cut of $1,650, compared with $1,280 under the original plan. Women are better off. Importantly, Treasury modelling also shows that the changes will not impact the inflation outlook. The changes will deliver an adjustment to the distribution of the benefits so that they are better spread across a broader segment of the population, so that every income earner in Australia receives a tax cut this time around, so that those who need the most receive more and, simply put, so that it is fairer. Since the changes were announced by the government, I have consulted extensively with my electorate of Mackellar. I conducted my own electorate-wide survey and, as always, was impressed by the level of thought and reflection of the respondents. The key takeaways of my survey were these: 47 per cent of respondents who live in Mackellar considered that they would be better off under the original design of the stage 3 tax cuts; however, 76 per cent thought that the redesign was necessary in light of the current cost-of-living crisis, and only seven per cent of respondents to this survey thought that the government should have honoured its promise regardless of the economic circumstances. Further polling conducted last week independent of my office on behalf of the Australia Institute showed that 63 per cent of those surveyed in Mackellar support the redesign and 31 per cent oppose it. It seems that a clear majority of people both across Australia and from within my electorate of Mackellar support the redesign of the stage 3 tax cuts because it makes them fairer. However, it must be noted that these tax cut changes are only the start of the work that the government should do to alleviate the cost-of-living pressures for the most vulnerable Australians. This is because nearly one-third of Australians will receive no benefit from the changes. One-third of Australian households don't pay tax at all. I'm talking about retirees, people with disability, carers and the unemployed. Obviously, this group of Australians is amongst the most vulnerable in our country, and they are the ones who are doing it toughest of all. With the budget coming up in the next few months, I urge the government to do what it can to extend a helping hand to the one-third of Australians who need these stage 3 tax cuts the most but will get nothing from them. In short, the cost-of-living crisis needs to be urgently addressed for the millions of Australians who will not benefit from the stage 3 tax cuts, the millions of Australians struggling to get by on government benefits and the millions of Australians living in poverty. In my prebudget submission to the Treasurer, I called for several measures which would help this group of people. These include providing a further increase in rental assistance for recipients of government support, ensuring the ACCC's inquiry into price-gouging by supermarkets is properly funded so it's thorough and impactful, increasing the Medicare rebate to reduce out-of-pocket costs for patients, and ensuring the fall in wholesale energy prices due to the increasing renewable energy input is passed on to consumers and not gobbled up as profit by energy providers. In the longer term, as my crossbench colleague, the member for Wentworth, has been advocating for since her election, a broader tax reform debate must be put squarely on the table in order to drive greater productivity in the future and to address growing intergenerational inequality in this country. In recent decades, both the major parties have only tinkered around the edges of tax reform, each side fearful of being wedged by the other and, so, stuck playing short-term politics on tax reform. But broader tax reform is required so that we may prosper into the future and so as to address a number of critical issues that our country and our citizens are facing. The first of these is Australia's overreliance on income tax as our primary source of revenue. This must be addressed. Why? It is because personal income tax dampens productivity. Also, very importantly, if we do actually look ahead, beyond the next election cycle, as Australia's population ages, a smaller and smaller proportion of income earners will be responsible for carrying the ever-growing burden of Commonwealth costs. We are already facing burgeoning budgetary demands in many areas, such as defence, health, the NDIS, the energy system transition, aged care and disaster recovery following unnatural weather events of increasing frequency. It would be extremely short-sighted to imagine that a declining proportion of our population will be able to adequately shoulder these rapidly increasing costs. Multinational tax and the petroleum resource rent tax are two of the most important areas where reform is required. It's good to see that the issue of multinationals paying no tax in Australia is finally being addressed. This is long overdue, as overseas companies have made a practice of shifting profits overseas to low-tax havens to avoid paying tax in Australia. But the paltry state of the petroleum resource rent tax that is collected for offshore oil and gas projects in this country must also be addressed. Australia's PRRT is amongst the most generous to industry in the world. The government's timid changes to the PRRT in the May 2023 budget were disappointing to say the least. The increase was a minuscule $600,000 each year for four years. Let's compare Australia's PRRT to what is happening in other countries around the world. Qatar is a country that exports an amount of gas similar to the amount exported by Australia, yet Qatar collects 20 times the amount of revenue from it that Australia does. Then there's Norway. Norway has been taxing the export profits of its oil and gas industry at 78 per cent since 1996—and, no, despite the fearmongering it did not dampen investment in that country in that sector. With this revenue, the Norwegian government has built a public sovereign wealth fund which is now worth over $2 trillion, or $1.5 million for every Norwegian family of four. The Norwegian Ministry of Finance estimates that total government revenue from oil and gas will be $194 billion in 2023 alone. On the other hand, here in Australia, over the past 30 years oil and gas tax revenues have been whittled away to almost nothing, as the industry has successfully lobbied governments to water down the PRRT multiple times. In 1992 the amount the government received from the PRRT was 19 per cent of the total oil and gas sector revenue. By 2020 it had dropped to just one per cent. In 1996 corporate tax paid by the sector was 16 per cent of total revenue. By 2020 corporate tax had dropped to just two per cent of total revenue. To quote an economist who is the director of the Australia Institute, the Australian government 'collects more revenue from HECS fees than it gets from the petroleum resource rent tax'. Thank you, children. You're the backbone of our economy. Then, of course, there's the $11 billion that flows each year as subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. In the face of the Commonwealth government having to pay out billions in the future to clean up after climate-driven weather disasters, these anachronistic subsidies should be abolished and invested elsewhere, such as into growing advanced manufacturing capacity for green technologies in our country that will see our country prosper into the future and not be left behind as the rest of the world is transitioning away from fossil fuels. Tax reform must also address intergenerational inequality in this country. There is a concerning trend of homeownership being concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people. When it comes to how much of an annual salary it takes to buy a home, gen Z has it worst. On average, gen Z must pay up to 11 times their annual salary for the total cost of a home mortgage and 139 per cent of their average annual salary for a 20 per cent deposit. Compare that to how it was between 1959 and 1989. During this time, people had to fork out just four times their average annual salary to pay their mortgages and 35 per cent of their annual salary for a deposit. And let's not forget stamp duty. In 1985 new homeowners paid an average of $1,360 in stamp duty. In 2020 the average amount of stamp duty on a home was $23,600. That's 17.3 times higher than it was in 1985, despite the average house value increasing only 7.4 times in comparison. While the changes to the stage 3 tax cuts are fairer and respond to the current cost-of-living crisis, there is much more that needs to be done to address growing poverty and intergenerational inequality in this country and also to grow productivity. There needs to be a serious debate in this country about broader tax reform that sets our country up for a more prosperous and fairer future. 18:15 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper The Albanese Labor government has been working for all Australians since the very first day we came into government on 22 May 2022. We've been working hard across all portfolios, from the member for Watson introducing game-changing legislation to ensure that gig workers can get a fair day's wage to the member for Franklin making record investments in housing so all Australians can live with a roof over their head. And there's the work of my own portfolio of health, where the minister has ensured that bulk-billing is no longer in freefall and is making sure that women can get access to the health care they need. Since day 1, our No. 1 priority has been addressing the cost-of-living pressures and inflation. Yes—the Albanese Labor government is responding to the real, everyday concerns of Australian people, because we are a government that listens. We're a government that listens when people told us they were concerned about the cost of living as they were buying Christmas presents for their kids last year. We're a government that listened when pensioners and students said they were struggling to find a bulk-billed health service. We're a government that listened when parents were saying they struggled to buy school lunches as prices at the supermarkets kept going up. And we're a government that listened when people told us their weekly budgets were just not going as far as they used to. Labor is a government that listens and responds. We started by delivering $23 billion in targeted relief to help address all of those concerns, and we did this without adding to inflation. We've made medicines cheaper by allowing people to buy two scripts for the cost of one. We've made it easier and cheaper to see a doctor, making the biggest investment in bulk-billing in Medicare's history. We've provided energy bill relief through rebates and capping the prices of resources. We made child care cheaper. We expanded paid parental leave. We're building more social and affordable homes and making the biggest increase in rent assistance in 30 years. Despite the global pressures at play right now, we've maintained a primary focus on the cost of living, keeping people well, getting wages moving, creating jobs and building a stronger economy for all Australians. That is the Labor way. That is why Labor's tax plan is so important. The plan is responding to the concerns of every single Australian, not just a select few, as was proposed by the former government. Tax cuts are part of a major suite of cost-of-living policies that we know are making a huge difference to people's lives. The changes were a direct response to the concerns of Australians, showing they have a Prime Minister that listens, responds and will do the right thing, even if that thing is hard. He's done the right thing by families, by all workers—young workers, middle-aged workers, older workers—and for women, including single women, who are often forgotten when it comes to fiscal policy and who struggle in a world designed for dual-income households. You know, Deputy Speaker, I have dedicated a lot of my working life, as you have, to fighting for the rights of others. As a former president of the ACTU, fighting for workers was a priority, and it's why I was proud to see that the ACTU have come out in support of Labor's tax plan. They know that workers will be better off. In fact, the average weekly wage-earner will be nearly $1,500 better off. This is targeted, practical cost-of-living relief. We want people to earn more and to keep more of what they earn. This isn't about politics; it's about doing what's right for the right reasons. There's a particular part of Labor's tax plan that I wanted to highlight. Unlike those opposite, Labor knows that the gender pay gap is real. Labor knows that women in highly feminised industries need cost-of-living relief, and it's why, under Labor's plan, 98 per cent of those women employed in highly feminised industries will get a better deal. That means teachers, nurses, childcare workers, cleaners and aged- and disability-care workers will all be better off under Labor's plan. Hardworking women who may have returned to work part time while they juggle the duties of caring for children will be better off under Labor's tax plan. Hardworking women, often in low- and middle-income jobs, deserve more to assist them to make ends meet. Single women and single mothers will fare better. Under our tax plan, women, on average, will get a tax cut of $1,649 each year. Some people, maybe those opposite, will not think this is a lot, but Labor knows that this will genuinely make a difference at a time when action is needed the most. When I asked my daughter, a 36-year-old teacher with two kids, what she knew about the new tax cuts—I often ask my kids, as bellwethers on how policies are going—her answer was simple. She said: 'Mum, this is about me. It will help me.' That made me so happy. Labor is committed to achieving true gender equality, to promoting better working conditions and outcomes for women and to closing the gender pay gap. The changes from what those opposite wanted, with no regard for low- and middle-income earners, are a welcome addition to all that we are doing for the women of Australia. In my own portfolio, Labor is working to shine a spotlight on women's health. The health and wellbeing of women and girls is something I'm incredibly passionate about and will continue to advocate for in this building. As a nurse for more than 20 years, as a woman, as a grandmother and now as Assistant Minister for Health and Aged Care, I have seen firsthand the difficulties women face with their healthcare needs. Poor care means time out of the workforce, less career advancement or sometimes having to give up work altogether. Loss of income is a reality for many women because we are letting them down healthcare-wise. Ensuring Australians receive the care and support they need regardless of their class, race or cultural background is a high priority for this Labor government—for all Labor governments. We are fortunate in this country to have a world-class health system supported by so many wonderful nurses, doctors and other health professionals, but it needs a reboot when it comes to addressing women's and girls' health issues. I'm pleased to say that this government has already begun that reboot. We've invested more than $65 million in targeted support for the health and wellbeing of Australia's women and girls. We have Australia's first endometriosis and pelvic pain clinics, and they're opening across all states and territories. There are 22 clinics nationally. We're subsidising the freezing of embryos for women with cancer and other health issues. We have established the National Women's Health Advisory Council, which I'm very proud to chair. It will give me particular advice about how we can improve the health system for women. We have added hour-long consults to the MBS so that doctors can spend the time they need with women to sort out often complex health issues. This is keeping women healthy. This is improving their lives. This means they can contribute to the economy and, indeed, their own budgets and bottom lines. All of these things complement the savings women will enjoy from the new tax plan. Childcare workers, very low paid workers, will enjoy around an extra $1,000. This will change their lives. Those who rely on child care can add the extra income they will get from Labor's tax plan to the savings they've made because we introduced cheaper child care. Aged-care workers got a 15 per cent pay rise, and they now will enjoy a tax cut of around $1,000. Nurses, who we know from research work, on average, a fortnight of unpaid overtime every year, will definitely welcome the $1,500 to $2,000 extra they will get in their pocket due to Labor's tax plan. Nurses, who work damn hard all the time, will definitely appreciate this. Teachers, like my kids, now feel seen, feel heard and actually feel cared about by a government that is offering them an income bonus of around $2,000 thanks to this tax plan. I haven't even mentioned the savings that disability workers, shop assistants, hospitality workers and other low-paid workers will garner from our tax plan, but you can rest assured that they now know they have a government, a Labor government, that has listened, has responded and has taken action to make their lives better. This is a Labor government that works for all Australians. 18:25 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Keeping faith with voters, with the public, is important and it comes down to a matter of trust. At the moment, political trust is at a very big low, unfortunately. I appreciate what other members, those opposite, have said about giving Australians a tax cut. We hear that; we understand that on this side of the House. We are parties—the Liberals and Nationals—of giving people tax breaks because we understand how the economy works. We understand how important it is, particularly in a time of a cost-of-living crisis, how vital it is for people to be able to have more disposable income, for people to take home more of the money that they earn. I think that line that Labor keeps using—taking home more of the money they earn—was actually pinched from the coalition's last set of talking points when we were in government, because that is what we stand for and that is what we delivered. It's what we delivered. Indeed, I know when I was the small business minister, the tax rates went to their lowest point since before World War II. Through successive treasurers, we have argued for lower taxes. We have delivered lower taxes. I am proud to be giving a speech alongside the member for Hume, a very good friend of mine and the shadow Treasurer, who, like me, comes to this place and wonders why the Labor members don't talk about the stage 1 and stage 2 tax cuts. I appreciate we are in the stage 3 discussion now, but stages 1 and 2 helped lower and middle-income earners—families, workers. If you have a look at the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman's website—and I urge all small businesses to utilise that because it is a very good place at which to get information when running your small business—it shows that the number of businesses between zero and 19 employees is a little bit over 2½ million. The total number when you take in the medium-size businesses up to 199 employees is 64,500. If you include large businesses with 200-plus employees, of which there are 4,900, they amount to 2,589,873 businesses. That is a lot of businesses. Those businesses, particularly those small businesses, are helping to run the economy, helping to make Australia's balance of payments, helping to pay the bills to keep the nation's lights on. Although, I should mention that at the moment Victoria is going through a terrible state with power outages. I think that is just the start of worse things to come as we have this crazy push to go away from traditional power sources, but that's another point altogether. What we are seeing with this debate on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024 and all the associated arguments with it is a betrayal. It is an absolute outright betrayal by those opposite, particularly the Prime Minister, on Australian voters. Because prior to the election and even after the election, even up to when Treasury decided to model these figures, he and those opposite said that stage 3 tax cuts were enshrined in legislation. They were in law. Mr Taylor 231027 They did. Mr McCORMACK 219646 They did, I hear the shadow Treasurer say. They were law. They weren't going to be changed; they weren't going to be altered. They were part of what Labor said: 'Trust us. Vote for us. All will be well. All will be right. You can count on us.' Well, the Australian public now know that they cannot count on Labor. They can't count on Labor when it comes to stage 3 tax cuts. They can't count on Labor when it comes to much of anything. What we have seen from this Labor government since it came to power in May 2022 is a change to the Murray-Darling Basin, where productive water is going to be taken away from farmers and given to the environment. That's going to cause less food to be grown, that's going to cause local grocery prices to go up and that's going to cause imported food to come into this country at a higher rate than what was otherwise the case. What we've seen is Labor put in place a truckie tax. What we've seen is Labor put in place a biosecurity tax just this week, where Australian farmers are expected to pay for the biosecurity of imported products from overseas. I mean, in what parallel universe would that otherwise occur? It wouldn't happen in any other country. You wouldn't see Australian products going to any other country and their farmers being expected to pay for our food coming in and the biosecurity thereof. It's just ridiculous. Those opposite declared before the 2022 poll that they would do politics differently. 'Trust us,' they said, 'we'll be more transparent. We'll be more accountable.' Well, it hasn't occurred. It hasn't materialised. The Prime Minister has backflipped on a key election promise, and if he's prepared to backflip on this, what else is he prepared to do? What else is to come? What else is Treasury modelling, as we speak, to hurt the Australian public, to hurt Australian investors, to hurt Australian families and to hurt Australian small businesses? I know it sounds glib and trite, but small businesses are the backbone of the economy. They are, and they're not getting any joy from this government. They're not getting any hope from Labor. Mr Taylor 231027 But they won't hurt union officials. Mr 219646 They won't hurt union officials, shadow Treasurer. We've just heard how, newsflash, the ACTU has agreed with these tax laws. Who would've thought? Who would've thought that? Now, after the news broke that Labor would betray its commitment to stage 3 tax cuts I had contact with Matthew Higginson. He's from the town of Coolamon, and I know the shadow Treasurer knows that little town very well, just 40 kilometres from Wagga Wagga. Mr Higginson is a father of seven, soon to be eight—congratulations on that score. He works full time. He's the sole breadwinner for his family—not unusual in the bush. On top of the kids, he also provides financial support for his 75-year-old father, Michael, who lives with him. He says he doesn't receive any family tax benefits or any other financial subsidy or support from the government. That's what he says. He's got a mortgage worth half a million dollars. He was quite prepared to share this with me and quite prepared to share it publicly. He was looking forward to the stage 3 tax cuts to provide him some breathing space against inflation, out of control on Labor's watch, and Labor's cost-of-living crisis—and it is Labor's cost-of-living crisis because it has occurred on Labor's watch. Matthew is one of the earners between $146,000 and $200,000, who those opposite decided do not deserve the tax break that was previously legislated, previously agreed upon, previously all shared policy. He's one that was promised. People such as Matthew are not ultrawealthy. They're not. All he wants to do is provide for his growing family and pay his dues. He gets that. It's so tough when those opposite are actively setting out to make his life more expensive. People such as Matthew across the country now know that Labor's word means absolutely nothing—absolutely diddly squat. Why should anyone trust the Labor government when they can so blatantly fib and so blatantly breach trust and faith with Australians? Just be up front. That's what Matthew and others want. Just tell us what you're going to do. It also comes back to the fact that you don't ever believe what Labor say they're going to do. You have to just watch and wait and see what they actually do when they get elected. We all know it's the same old story—say one thing before the election; do completely the opposite after it. This betrayal reminds me of Labor's election commitment to reduce power prices by $275. Hands up all of those who've seen that $275 price reduction in their power bills. I thought so. They're all very busy, looking down at their talking points provided by the Labor dirt unit on their phones. They're probably looking at how many emails they're getting from disillusioned constituents. No-one has seen their power prices come down. They did come down on our watch. In the last two financial years— Mr McCORMACK 219646 It's not rubbish at all, Minister. In the last two financial years of the coalition government, household electricity prices came down— Honourable members interjecting— Mr McCORMACK 219646 We've got a couple of speakers here: one at the dispatch box and one next to me. But the facts are the same: it was by 8 per cent, and for businesses it was by 10 to 12 per cent. See, we know the figures. We know the figures because our constituents are telling us: 'Yes; power prices did come down under you. Why are they so high under Labor?' They want to know why. They want to know why there's been that breach of faith, that breach of promise, that breach of trust. Honourable members interjecting— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 Honourable members! Mr Taylor 231027 Get some facts checked! She's fact-free. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230531 I'm nearly calling a point of order on you, member for Hume. You started it. Mr McCORMACK 219646 He's passionate, you see? He's absolutely passionate. So he should be, because he is the shadow Treasurer, and he looks opposite and sees the member for Rankin, who ain't no Paul Keating, let me tell you. He's certainly no Paul Keating, and he's certainly not of that ilk where Labor treasurers actually understood—like Michael Eagan, the former New South Wales Treasurer and the longest-serving state Treasurer in New South Wales history who died just the other day, and God rest his soul. They understood reality, Michael Egan and Paul Keating. They actually did get how people are feeling, because they were in touch with their constituents. This mob aren't. Certainly, the member for Rankin is not. Let's just have a look at 18 months of Labor and what has actually gone up in that time. With the cost of food, there's been a 9 per cent increase, and the cost of housing is up 12 per cent—that's if you can afford a house. It is so hard. We heard how the Minister for Housing, the member for Franklin, had a program under her watch to build—I don't know, was it a million houses? Then it became—who knows?—tens of thousands. I don't think we'll ever see a house built. When I raised the issue about the Victorian state Labor government shutting down the timber industry, she interjected on me during a matter of public importance or a speech. I was making an earnest point, and she said, 'What's timber got to do with housing?' or thereabouts. Really? That's what houses are built out of. Anyway, I digress. The cost of insurance is up 22 per cent. The cost of electricity is up 20 per cent. Just don't mention that in front of Victorians at the moment who are in darkness. The cost of gas is up 27 per cent. Those opposite don't want gas anyway; they want it eliminated. The Treasurer comes to the dispatch box during his last budget speech and talks about 'the things we sell overseas'. He can't talk about agriculture or coal or iron ore or gas. He can't dare mention those forbidden words—coal and iron ore and gas. 'The things we sell overseas,' he says. He was the first Treasurer in 25 years not to mention the word 'infrastructure' in his budget speech. That's just shameful. But no wonder he didn't mention it, because just prior to the election—a couple of weeks beforehand—Labor put in place a 90-day review into all of the infrastructure that was being built under the Liberals and Nationals. How long do you reckon that 90-day review took? Mr McCORMACK 219646 I shouldn't start the member for Hume off again, because I won't get another word in edgeways. It was more than 200 days. But that's pretty good for Labor, really, when you think about it—from 90 for 200. That's pretty close for Labor. This isn't pretty close. This is an outrage. Whilst we appreciate that people do need tax breaks, it just goes to show that Labor fibbed again. 18:40 Dr LEIGH BU8 Fenner More people working, more people earning more, more people keeping more of what they earn. That's what's happening with Labor's bigger, better, fairer tax cuts. These tax cuts are better for workers, better for women and better for labour supply. Despite all the hand-wringing from those opposite, in their guts, the Liberal and National parties will back these cuts. They'll do so because they know that 84 per cent of taxpayers will be better off. They know that the average taxpayer is getting double the tax cut under this plan. All Australian taxpayers will get a tax cut on 1 July, and the top tax threshold will come down for the first time since Labor was last in office. Labor's bigger, better, fairer tax cuts are going to ensure that everyone gets a tax cut. Previously, those earning under $45,000—apprentices, childcare workers, hairdressers—were going to miss out. Now they too will get a tax cut. Treasury estimates that this will have a big impact on labour supply, twice the impact on labour supply as the previous plan. Our tax cuts will boost labour supply by nearly a million hours a week, the equivalent of 25,000 full-time jobs. Our tax cuts are better for women, with 90 per cent of taxpaying women getting a bigger tax cut under our plan. That means teachers, nurses, aged and disability carers and early childhood educators. Treasury has been clear that our changes are broadly revenue neutral and won't add to inflation. Our changes will reduce inequality and they'll increase opportunity. We are engaging in serious tax reform. We're dropping two rates and lifting two thresholds. We're addressing bracket creep, and we're not just addressing bracket creep at the top; we're addressing bracket creep for low- and middle-income workers as well. Aspiration doesn't depend on your bank balance. There's this false notion out there that, somehow, aspiration has an income cut-off and there's only aspiration above that threshold. But we in the Labor Party know that aspirational families can be found in every postcode in Australia, in every community in Australia. That's why in every one of those communities, every taxpayer will get a tax cut. Under our plan, barristers still get a tax cut, but baristas get one too. Under our plan, CEOs still get a tax cut, but cleaners get one too. Under our plan, surgeons still get a tax cut, but security guards get one too. Tax reform doesn't have to just benefit billionaires, it can benefit battlers too. That's exactly what Labor's bigger, better, fairer tax cuts will do. 18:43 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest Many people in my electorate of Forrest and around Australia have been struggling with the cost of living, and still are. Not only are emergency relief groups reporting significant increases in the number of people needing help; they're also reporting providing help to people who have never needed it before. This has been the case for the last 18 months, and I think the Prime Minister must have had a sudden insight, or brainwave, or epiphany maybe over Christmas. Perhaps this was when he was actually in Australia, as opposed to overseas or on Toto 1. We are somehow expected to believe that, suddenly, after 18 months of distraction and mismanagement of the economy, the PM belatedly realised that there are millions of Australians struggling with the cost of living. But let's be honest here. This decision is only about the Prime Minister's job and the Dunkley by-election. There is no doubt that Labor has mismanaged the economy and that Australians are worse off as a result—higher interest rates, high inflation, high cost of living and increased spending of an additional $209 billion since Labor came to government. But we also know the Prime Minister chose this option instead of one of the other options provided by Treasury, alternative options that would not have broken Labor's election promises or pitted one Australian against another in a dreadful class warfare act, taking from one group of taxpayers to give to another. To the people who were promised tax cuts through legislation, Labor is actually saying, ' You don't deserve those legislated tax cuts.' This decision actively disincentivises Australians who want to or need to earn and retain more of their income to provide for their families. Removing that 37 per cent tax bracket incentivises workers, no matter where they start, to keep upskilling, investing in opportunities or simply taking on the extra shifts to increase their incomes to meet their commitments and, as I say, support their families. This comes at the same time that people are already paying more tax to the government. Personal income tax receipts have risen by a record 27 per cent, with the lost LMITO and bracket creep combined. Labor is trying to sell its changes as overall tax cuts, but Labor is actively entrenching bracket creep. This may be a short-term sugar hit that we see in this legislation; however, Treasury have said that this legislation will actually see an increase in taxes of $1.3 billion over the next four years and $28 billion over the next decade. One point eight million households and taxpayers will be worse off, and they are the ones who will not receive those legislated stage 3 tax cuts. Four million households will be worse off over the medium term. In fact, this is going to affect many young people as they improve their incomes, even those that are not yet in the workforce itself. The coalition will always support lower taxes. Like my colleagues, I respect and value the Australians who work and pay the taxes that fund so many of the government-delivered services and programs that people rely on. But Labor have deliberately broken a promise they repeatedly made to the Australian people. The Prime Minister looks shifty in this instance. It was a promise made around 100 times—before, during and after the election. Australians now know they cannot trust anything that comes out of the mouths of the Prime Minister, the Treasurer or any Labor member or senator. The Prime Minister's now immortal words, 'My word is my bond,' translated actually mean—and they know it—'I will do and say whatever I need to to get elected and change it later.' The same can be said of the Prime Minister's pre-election promise: … 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. He also said, 'We're not going to interfere with the legislated tax cuts which are there.' No-one will forget what is clearly a demonstrated, calculated and deliberate deceit—the deliberate misleading of the Australian people by the Prime Minister. 'Trust', Prime Minister—you used this word constantly during the election campaign. Well, you've lost the trust of the Australian people and you've proven to them that you lack integrity. While there are some people who will benefit from this broken promise, a broken promise is a broken promise. Prime Minister, your word is no longer your bond. Every time the Prime Minister or Treasurer says, 'We have not changed our position,' or 'We are not considering or planning any changes,' the Australian people will know, and they do know, that they cannot trust you. Australians know that this is just the start. What's next? What's the next broken promise? Will it be capital gains? Will it be negative gearing? Will it be inheritance taxes? Will it be changes to family trusts? The list is endless. But we do know that nothing is off the table, and every time the Prime Minister, the Treasurer or Labor members say the words, 'We're not considering it,' or 'We have no plans,' those are Labor's code words for, 'Watch this space.' But the greatest cost of this legislation is the critical lost opportunity for actual tax reform such as was contained in the existing legislated stage 3 tax cuts—tax reform that would have actively encouraged and rewarded aspirational Australians. They would have been encouraged to have a red-hot go, whether in small business or in employment or career opportunities. That tax reform would have encouraged every hardworking, taxpaying Australian earning between $45,000 and $200,000, because the 37c-in-the-dollar tax bracket would have been removed. For people doing overtime or taking on extra shifts, there would have been no booby-trap in that pay packet through that bracket creep. This would have been genuine tax reform, a genuine incentive for hardworking, aspirational Australians—and I encourage every one of them. It would have addressed the disincentive of bracket creep that they face. For workers who would have been able to keep more of their own money, the money they have earned through their own efforts, bracket creep is now still the biggest problem thanks to Labor. Why work harder and longer to earn more, just to give it to Labor to waste or hand to someone else? Even worse, it's a great brake on productivity. We are further away from a tax system that is fit for purpose right now and into the future, for those who work hard, train or study, or move on to better paying roles in their chosen jobs or careers; the people who want to start and grow their own business; or, for instance, the many talented tradies who are in such short supply. These are the people who are prepared to take the risk, invest their own money, start their own small business and build it up. We see those young people so often in the small-business awards, and I say, 'Hallelujah,' to them. They may have to mortgage their house, their car and perhaps their kids to have a go, but have a go they do. I take my hat off to every small-business owner in my electorate. Small businesses employ our locals. Small businesses support the sporting clubs and local emergency services. Small-business owners are often the people doing that same work voluntarily. They are often the volunteers in our communities. They support our local jobs by creating local jobs in our regional communities. They are the people who often give our young people their very first job in a small business. They also can be those wonderful people who give more mature, older people their last job. This is critical in our economy and our small communities. That helps drive productivity and leads to real higher wages for their workers. I want to see more young people able to get ahead. However, the PBO's SMART model shows that Australians aged from 25 to 55 will be worse off on average as a result of Labor's legislation. The first two stages of the income tax changes that we made went to lower-income earners. Twelve million Australians benefited from stages 1 and 2 of the coalition tax reforms, and that delivered over $40 billion in tax relief to low- and middle-income earners. People on $70,000 have each kept more than $9,000 of their income as a result, and 10 million Australians earning below $120,000 received tax relief through the low- and middle-income tax offset, that cost-of-living offset that was so critical to them. It included 8.2 million people earning below $90,000. We know Labor that promised at least 97 times that they would reduce electricity prices by $275. They repeatedly promised that they would lower electricity prices, and they haven't. The Prime Minister won't even mention that figure. The Prime Minister also promised cheaper mortgages, but that hasn't happened either. When I talk to and listen to people in my electorate, I find that the ones who have a mortgage are really struggling at this time, having to change what they do in their family and in their life because of the cost of interest rates on their mortgages. As someone who's spent a significant amount of time warning people of all ages about the dangers of online scams, I want to finish with a very accurate analogy drawn by the member for Berowra in his contribution. He spoke about the scams that Australians face every day, where online scammers make promises to deliver or do something or actively pretend to be someone they're not. Throughout the scam, the scammer keeps reassuring their victim that there's nothing to fear, that there's no problem and that all the victim has to do is simply trust the scammer. In this instance, the Prime Minister is the scammer. And that is what this legislation is about. It is about Labor's dreadful scam and deliberate deception of the Australian people for the Prime Minister's short-term gain. As I said, the coalition will always support lower taxes, but we will take a tax reform package to the next election that will deliver lower, simpler and fairer taxes to help fight bracket creep to enable and encourage and foster aspirational Australians to keep more of their own money. I know that the policies in this tax space and others will actually have a major impact on regional and remote parts of Australia. I've been farming in this country with my husband and family for 50 years. I'm a very mature-aged person. However, given the changes that Labor has made repeatedly and their policy decisions, I have never seen rural and regional Australia under as much pressure as we are now, for so many reasons, or small and medium businesses. Having a small business has always been tough, but right now it's tougher for so many than it's ever been. I just want to encourage all those small- and family-business people who may be watching or listening tonight. We actually value and respect every single thing you do. There is a dairy farmer in my electorate who has been constantly under pressure from various means. He produces enough milk every year to feed 60,000 people. He said to me, 'The layer upon layer that we're noticing—the changes to industrial relations—one thing after another from this government.' He said to me, 'We produce the best-quality milk in Australia. We produce the best-quality food and fibre for Australians and others around the world. At some point, wouldn't you think that one of the things the government could do is just say thank you to those people?' 18:57 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite Today we witnessed the absurdity of an opposition leader who vocally opposes Labor's tax cuts but plans to vote for them. What a cruel joke! On 1 July this year, every Australian taxpayer will get a tax cut. For an Australian worker on an average wage, this means $1,500 more in their pocket each year—a yearly boost that would not have been received under the former coalition government's plan. These tax cuts are aimed squarely at people who work hard to make a difference for themselves and their families. Our Labor government wants Australians to earn more and to keep more of what they earn. This reform also responds to cost-of-living pressures facing Australians right now, and that's why I stand today to support the Treasury Laws Amendment (Cost of Living Tax Cuts) Bill 2024. This tax reform will provide cost-of-living relief for 13.6 million taxpayers across the nation. This is a plan for middle Australia that delivers for every Australian taxpayer, right up and down the income ladder, from Portarlington in my electorate to Port Hedland, from Leopold in my electorate to Launceston, and from Torquay in my electorate to Townsville. This tax reform means that 90 per cent of women will now receive a bigger tax cut. More than 95 per cent of nurses, teachers and truckies will now get a bigger tax cut. Health workers, childcare workers and hospitality workers will now receive a tax cut. Taxpayers earning less than $45,000 will now receive a tax cut. And this will significantly boost the take-home pay of Australians working in some of the most low-paid jobs across the nation. Factory workers in Grovedale to retail workers in Armstrong Creek are all supported under our plan. But the opposition leader and the coalition seem uneasy about embracing this much-needed reform. Rather, the opposition leader wants hardworking Australians on call 24 hours a day. He opposes higher wages. He votes against help with your power bill. He votes against cheaper medicines. He votes against affordable housing and penalty rates. And his stance wavers like a reed in the wind. While he reluctantly says he is supporting Labor's tax cuts, he argues against them endlessly. Australians do deserve better. They deserve a leader who gets the job done in the best interests of all Australians. These tax cuts are the right decision at the right time. They do put money in the pockets of hardworking Australians without impacting inflation. Labor is making the right decisions for the right reasons, and that's why the Leader of the Opposition is voting for those decisions. Many local people have said the same to me. They have welcomed this tax reform, they have written to me over the past month, and they've come to me at markets and at street stalls and said: 'Thank you. You are listening to us and our need for relief from costs.' Those costs are really putting them under pressure. They recognise that, for a family on an average household income of around $130,000, with one partner earning $80,000 and the other $50,000, their combined tax cut will now be over $2,600, which is about $50 a week and $1,600 more than they would have received under the coalition's plan. This reform adds to our record investment in Medicare, the boosted, cheaper Child Care Subsidy and electricity price relief. These are important initiatives, and they will not add to inflationary pressures while laying the foundations for a stronger and more resilient economy. Labor governments have always understood this. Former Labor prime minister Gough Whitlam said in the late seventies: The task before us is … to give our young people, our unemployed, our small business people, our migrants a new hope—hope for decent jobs, hope in their future and the future of their country. This remains our task, and it remains Labor's commitment to all communities across the nation. In essence, our plan responds to his call for hope for a better future. The Albanese government's tax reform delivers a better, more progressive tax system, addressing bracket creep more evenly. Our plan returns bracket creep for all taxpayers and does more to reduce the impact on those most burdened by it. By dropping two tax rates and lifting two thresholds, we are providing almost $360 billion in help with the cost of living, and, as a result, the average taxpayer will pay $21,635 less in their income in tax over the next decade. Treasury estimates our changes will increase labour supply by around 930,000 hours per week. This is more than double the labour supply impact of the former coalition government's plan. As our Treasurer has made clear, the most recent inflation figures show a welcome moderation. It's still too high, but it is moderating. Treasury is clear: our tax plan will not impact their forecasts for inflation. In closing, I know families in my electorate of Corangamite and across the country are being hit hard by the cost of living, and that's why our Albanese government's No. 1 priority is to deliver cost-of-living relief. This is a bill that will support all Australians. It will help manage inflation and benefit Australian families. It supports small business by increasing labour supply and, importantly, it will benefit all women, many of them in jobs where they are paid less than the average. I'm proud that it will have a great impact for women. I'm very proud to support our government's approach to reducing cost-of-living pressures whilst also managing inflation. I do urge all those on the crossbench and in the Senate to support these bills. Let's embrace cost-of-living relief, and let's embrace this tax reform. It makes absolute sense. I commend the bill to the House. 19:04 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker The people of Barker pride themselves on a lot of things. But if I was being completely frank I'd say that mine is an honest electorate. It's a place where a person's word is their bond. The Prime Minister's decision to break his word and his bond on the stage 3 tax cuts, I'm sad to say, joins a long list of broken promises, including those around lower electricity prices, cheaper mortgages, and the commitment to keep his hands off superannuation and franking credits. At a local level, constituents in my electorate were encouraged by the Prime Minister's commitment of a $275 reduction in electricity bills. But it will come as no surprise that they're still waiting for that $275 reduction. Families in Kingston in the south-east of South Australia, in my electorate, in the lead-up to the last federal election were promised $1.8 million to help fund the establishment of a purpose-built childcare facility. It was a commitment we had made and one that, happily, those opposite, during the election, matched. I say 'happily' because at the point that the commitment was made we were going to see a redeveloped childcare facility in Kingston irrespective of the election outcome. As someone who's outcomes focused, I thought that was a particularly good thing. But unfortunately that is also an unfulfilled commitment at this stage. Despite it being more than 14 months since the election and close to two years since the original commitment, that $1.8 million election promise is yet to materialise. It's not only broken promises that make this government untrustworthy. It's also their lack of transparency. Prior to the 2022 election, people in the Riverland, in my electorate, didn't believe that those opposite would return to a policy of water buybacks. Why? Because those opposite weren't open and honest about that. When I warned the people of the Riverland that that was exactly what those opposite had in store for them, I was accused by those opposite—or at least the candidate on behalf of the Australian Labor Party—of 'resorting to fearmongering'. Yet even now that we know that buybacks are being implemented there's no transparency about how much those opposite are willing to pay for that water or indeed where the water is going to come from. In the south-east of my electorate, along the beautiful Limestone Coast, the local lobster fishermen weren't told that while they would be still hurting from the loss of key international markets Labor would swoop in and propose a job-destroying, industry-destroying proposal for a Southern Ocean offshore wind farm in their fertile fishing grounds. Yet that's exactly where we are—and not a mention of it before the last election. Equally, farmers across my electorate weren't told that they'd be slugged with a $50 million a year biosecurity protection levy—a levy on Australian farmers to protect them from the actions of those they compete against who are importing product to this country. And Sturt Highway road users, rejoicing in the news that we would finally see the establishment of a Truro bypass around that township to increase the productivity and safety of the Sturt Highway—a major transport route between Adelaide and interstate and indeed up to Sydney—would not have thought it possible that the federal government would retract funding for such an important piece of infrastructure. Over $220 million was committed to this Truro freight route. Yet that's exactly what Labor has done—a project that has been talked about for probably close to the entirety of my adult life, a project that took 10 years to get to Infrastructure Australia's priority list and then, after 10 years on the priority list, was gone in a moment. I'd have a lot more respect for those opposite if prior to the election they'd said to the road users of the Sturt Highway, 'If you vote for us, just understand that the Sturt Highway will not see a bypass around the community of Truro.' I'd have more respect for those opposite if they'd said to the cray fishermen on the Limestone Coast, 'Just understand a vote for us is a vote for a gargantuan offshore wind complex in your fertile fishing ground which will effectively prohibit you from fishing in a 5,000 square kilometre area.' I'd have more respect for those opposite if they'd been clear and upfront about the biosecurity levy that would be imposed on Australian farmers. I'd have more respect for those opposite—indeed, I think my electorate would—if they'd said to the people of Kingston, 'We acknowledge the commitment made by the coalition government for $1.8 million towards a childcare facility and we'll do our very best to match that,' but that's not what the commitment was. I think they'd have a lot more respect for the Prime Minister if he had said, 'We will do everything within our power to put downward pressure on electricity prices,' instead of saying that they could expect a $275 reduction. The stark reality, friends, is that our Prime Minister has his priorities, unfortunately. They're not priorities about addressing the cost of living. It's not about road safety. It's not about business confidence or food security. Sadly, my observation of the first period of the Albanese prime ministership is that we have a Prime Minister whose only priority is maintaining the office of Prime Minister. This is a government that has quickly become arrogant, complacent, economically incompetent and untrustworthy. In recent days and weeks, the Prime Minister has revelled in regaling this place—particularly during question time—with the ABC docuseries Nemesis. It caused me to reflect on the Prime Minister lying in bed listening to or watching that program. He might have been lying on the couch in the Lodge, doing that— The DEPUTY SPEAKER interjecting— Mr PASIN 240756 I mean physically lying, of course. I'm not making any other assertion. The point I want to make to the Prime Minister—in his absence from the chamber—is that your time will come. The reality is that there'll be a similar documentary about the Albanese years, and I reasonably anticipate that there will be a number of frontbenchers interviewed around this critical decision to break his word and his promise on the stage 3 tax cuts. We all know why this has happened. It's got nothing to do with cost-of-living pressures, because if cost-of-living pressures were the No. 1 priority of those opposite they wouldn't have spent close to half a billion dollars and 12 months of this nation's energy and enthusiasm on an ill-fated attempt to recast the Australian Constitution with a Voice to Parliament. Really this change has been about a Prime Minister who's desperately concerned about the Dunkley by-election. That's the truth. The Dunkley by-election is a real-time measure for the Prime Minister regarding his performance. I expect that, littered amongst the thinkers on the backbench, there are a whole bunch of people who are acutely aware of their margins. They'll be looking at whatever movement there is in the electoral pendulum in Dunkley. The Prime Minister knows that and he doesn't want a significant swing against him in that seat because that will cause consternation. The reality is that when we go to the Dunkley by-election and there's a swing against the government and the Prime Minister subsequently sees that his great policy white knight, these changes to stage 3 tax cuts, don't deliver him the Newspoll bump or improvement he's looking for, he will sadly be left holding the baby. He won't have any support from those who've suggested it's a good thing to do right now. They'll be lining up, one after another, to answer the questions of whoever is assigned this role within the ABC, or whatever other outlet, to say, 'You know, we always thought it was a bad strategy long term.' And of course it's a bad strategy long term, because everything's about trust. I began my contribution by saying that my electorate is a place where your word is still your bond to the honest folk of Barker. Now, I don't think Barker is unique in that regard. There are 150 other electorates in this place for which each and every member of parliament could say exactly the same thing. Because, as Australians, deep down we say what we mean and we do what we say. Deep down Australians want leaders who say what they mean and do what they say. That's why trust is everything. And that's why, with respect, this decision to rip up the trust statement between the now Prime Minister of Australia and the voting public across this nation is crazy brave. They won't forget that he was so quick to commit to a me-too approach on the then coalition's tax policy—not just before the election, but after the election—and yet so quick to rip it up for the short-term sugar hit that he's hoping to achieve at the Dunkley by-election. As I've made clear, this joins quite a legacy of broken promises. There are broken promises on the national scale—the commitment to lower electricity bills, lower mortgages, cheaper cost of living, higher real wages, no taxes on retirees, no taxes on transport operators and, as I mentioned, taxes on farmers. But there are also breaches of faith with the Australian people at very local levels across electorates. I've given some examples from my electorate. These are failures for which the people of my electorate will ultimately punish those opposite. But I expect that if I were to ask members around the chamber, particularly on the crossbench and on the opposition benches, if there are similar local breaches of faith, I'd find them. The reality is, that's before we even talk about what's coming next. And we know what's coming next. Despite the Treasurer's consternation and his attempts to deny it, the plan for wholesale wealth redistribution in this country, via reforms to the Australian tax system, will continue unabated. And I've got some really bad news for the people who might be listening to this broadcast, and particularly those in Barker: it won't be long, whether their hand is forced by their coalition partners in the Greens or otherwise, and they'll be coming after negative gearing and they'll be coming after concessions to capital gains tax. They can't resist it. We often talk about political DNA in this place, but, ultimately, deep inside the political DNA of those opposite is always a big-taxing, big-spending government. The only way you can be a big-taxing, big-spending government is if you go after people who have the wealth in this nation. 19:19 Ms CLAYDON 248181 Newcastle It is always interesting to come after the member for Barker. For all that faux outrage, the member for Barker is going to be sitting here, voting for these tax cuts when the vote comes through, just like all other members opposite because the truth is they know this plan was not fair. It would not have done what it was intended to do. This Labor plan for stage 3 tax cuts is now going to deliver a tax cut to every single Australian taxpayer. No-one misses out. We are not backing winners and losers here. It is a fair and equitable distribution of people's tax dollars to help them with extreme cost-of-living pressures that many people find themselves under today. So I rise to speak in support of the Albanese Labor government's cost-of-living tax cuts. Tax time, I am pleased to say, is fast approaching. I am delighted that, on 1 July this year, the Albanese Labor government will be delivering a tax cut for every single Australian taxpayer—that is, 13.6 million people. Not only that, 84 per cent of Australian taxpayers will get a bigger tax cut as a result of the government's proposal now. That is 11.5 million people who stand to be better off under this revamped stage 3 tax cut. An average income earner is set to benefit by $29 a week, which is more than double what they would have received under the old Morrison stage 3 policy. The Labor government understands that people are doing it tough right now, and I have heard first-hand from my constituents that they are struggling to make ends meet. I would also like to put on record that I have had constituents approach me and say, 'You know what, in these new revamped tax cuts, I am going to get less than I was going to get under Mr Morrison's old scheme.' But then they look you straight in the eye and say, 'It is okay. What you have done is a fairer and more equal distribution.' They support that, and I am really pleased that my community is so caring of each other that they want to make sure everyone stands to benefit. As I said, we are crystal clear that every taxpayer needs and deserves a meaningful tax cut, not just those people in higher tax brackets. That is what this plan is about. Everybody needs assistance now. Under the former Morrison government's plans, millions of young people, workers, part-timers, casuals were going to miss out. I tell you what, it is women who would have benefited least of all from those old stage 3 tax cuts. Tackling cost of living, I will come back to that. It is definitely worth teasing out a little bit for this chamber. Tackling cost-of-living pressures is Labor's No. 1 priority and that is why we are working to not just cut taxes but also to boost wages, bring inflation under control, and drive fairer prices for Australian consumers. So our proposal is reform work but it is also relief. We want to see Australians earning more money and we want to see them keeping more of what they earn. In my electorate of Newcastle, nurses, teachers, police, truckies are amongst those who are most likely to benefit, with more than 95 per cent of those taxpayers getting a bigger tax cut. In Newcastle, that means 655 truck drivers will be better off; 248 police officers will take advantage of these tax cuts; 2,571 registered nurses are going to see a benefit. And goodness me, who would deny those nurses are tax cut now? But there are another 3,403 school teachers who are going to have a bit more money in their hip pockets come 1 July. These are good changes that will have real benefit for workers and families that need it most. Now, we on this side of the House know full well that government policies are never gender-neutral. When it comes to distributing the benefits and burdens of tax and spending, they have different impacts for men and women. That is why the Albanese Labor government has applied a gender-impact lens over the changes to all these measures to ensure the significant benefit from these tax cuts will go to women. Women are the very people who stood to lose most of all from Mr Morrison's former stage 3 tax cuts. We have done that gendered analysis, because that's what good governments do. We try and make sure that the way in which we distribute the spend that is gained from people's tax burdens is equitable. When it's not, you've got to be able to counter that inequity. The Treasury modelling found that women comprised the majority of individuals earning less than $75,000. Can we let that fact sink in for those in this chamber now. It is predominantly women who are earning less than $75,000 a year. When it comes to looking at the people who are earning more than $128,000, less than 30 per cent of Australian women fit into that category. We know from a lot of experience what that means in our communities. But the Albanese Labor government's revamped stage 3 tax cuts mean that the average tax cut for women will climb from what was going to be $1,278 to $1,649. That's a lift of $371 compared with the Morrison government's old plan. From 1 July, the Albanese Labor government will deliver a tax cut for all women who pay tax in Australia. That is 6.5 million women taxpayers who will receive an average tax cut of $1,649. That also means a bigger tax cut for 90 per cent of Australian women taxpayers. That's how many are set to receive an additional tax cut of $770 on average compared to the Morrison government's plan. I know that, when members opposite go back to their constituencies, it's little wonder they will come and vote for this at the end of the day. Imagine going back, looking at all the women in your electorates and saying: 'You know what? You're not worth a tax cut. We don't believe that you deserve recompense now or to get a share of the relief that is being provided to workers and households.' Gender-responsive budgeting, of course, was a practice pioneered by the very first Labor woman to serve in a cabinet, Susan Ryan. She did so when the Hawke government handed down its 1984-85 budget. That was the application of the gendered-responsive budgeting process. We led the world in gender-responsive budgeting. And I've got to say—from that moment with Susan Ryan in 1984 right through to 2013, the federal government, regardless of which party was in power, produced a women's budget statement every single year to assess the impact that the new budget and taxation measures had on women. Shamefully, the Liberal government scrapped this practice when Tony Abbott was elected Prime Minister and appointed himself Minister for Women back in 2014. As chair of Labor's Status of Women Committee, I am proud that Labor has produced a women's budget statement from opposition each and every year to undertake this analysis. Now that we're in government, we continue this analysis, and equity for women is at the very centre of everything we do. Our job is to make sure that taxing and spending actually support women's equality. That's exactly what we're doing with these tax reforms. Australian women deserve that level of public commitment and accountability. I've been listening to the debates of those before me who are concerned about whether the Prime Minister's word is at stake here. It's a good question; we want to see trust in politics. But I tell you what: when you change your position based on very good evidence— Debate interrupted. ADJOURNMENT 71 ADJOURNMENT Regional Housing 71 19:30 Dr HAINES 282335 Indi Last Friday, I attended the National Regional Housing Summit, held at Old Parliament House, here in Canberra. The event, organised by the Regional Australia Institute, brought together leading voices on the housing crisis from across regional, rural and remote Australia. I thank the Regional Australia Institute very much for their leadership in doing this. As a regional Independent, I was inspired to hear from like-minded people and organisations, who are telling the federal and state governments to do better on regional housing. That's because regional Australia is in a housing crisis. Across the country, prices are higher than they've ever been, availability is at its lowest in decades and new builds are taking longer to complete. For so many families across regional Australia, interest rate rises and rent rises are making balancing the family budget harder than they've ever experienced. And, sadly, homelessness is on the rise across regional Australia and being seen in places we've never seen it before. It was with these challenges front of mind that representatives spanning the sectors of real estate, finance, construction, planning and government from across the country attended this National Regional Housing Summit. They were ready to have frank discussions and, importantly, though, propose bold solutions. I was pleased to hear from the Real Estate Institute of Australia, the Master Builders Association and the Bendigo and Adelaide Bank, to name but some—all key players in solving this housing crisis. What I heard throughout the day was that the key to solving the housing crisis in regional, rural and remote Australia is to increase supply. We need to increase affordable housing located close to jobs, schools and public transport. We also need more housing of a diverse nature, including medium-density housing. No, I'm not talking about building high-rises in regional towns, but we must move away from the default that the ideal house in a regional area is on a quarter-acre block with four bedrooms. The regions are trying to attract more essential workers—workers in aged care and child care, teachers, doctors, nurses and allied health—and often these people are looking for two- or maybe three-bedroom units, and they simply don't exist in the numbers that we need. At the summit, there was a distinct feeling in the room that the government has a blind spot when it comes to fixing the unique challenges of housing in regional Australia. The $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund—the government's signature housing policy—completely ignored the specific problems in regional, rural and remote Australia and failed to guarantee dedicated funding. I tried to amend the HAFF bill and the HAFF investment mandate to fix this, but the government refused. I then introduced my Unlocking Regional Housing Bill to the parliament. My bill would make funding for critical enabling infrastructure easier to access and would encourage the minister to secure at least 30 per cent of housing funding for regional Australia—proportionate to our population. The Unlocking Regional Housing Bill might not have passed in 2023, but I want to say: I'm not done yet. We need to see regional Australia receive its fair share of funding for housing, and I'll keep pushing the government to do more. I'm willing to work with members of this parliament from all parties to make progress. I was encouraged to hear the shadow minister for housing, the member for Deakin, speak on Friday about the Commonwealth's crucial role in helping local councils fund the enabling infrastructure that is key to fixing housing supply issues. Without upgrades to sewerage, drainage, footpaths, power, pavements and poles, local governments and developers simply can't build the housing we need in regional Australia. Without investing in this critical groundwork, the dial won't shift. The government and opposition should support my calls for a $2 billion regional housing infrastructure fund. The government's $500 million Housing Support Program for critical enabling infrastructure is a start, but it doesn't touch the sides to meet regional Australians' needs. The people in the know—the builders, local governments and community housing providers—back in my solutions, and I call on the government to get behind this. Some delegates called for dedicated and increased funding for regional local governments for critically enabling infrastructure that guarantees that the HAFF funding will be invested in the regions. Fixing the housing crisis will take the coordination of multiple levels of government, industry and community groups. But inaction isn't an option, because regional Australians, who feel they will never have a stable place to live, deserve more. Grocery prices 72 19:35 Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 Lyons It's no secret that Australians are under the pump, and we've seen price increases on daily purchases. But the cost of groceries is amongst the biggest concerns for many. The big supermarkets have made record profits. Coles posted a $1.1 billion full-year profit, and Woolies reached $1.6 billion. That's a four per cent increase on the previous year, while we've seen the price of daily items like meat and cheese skyrocket. Our farmers saw consumer prices increase at the supermarket while wholesale cattle market prices plunged in 2023. Lamb, for example—although of course not cattle—which cost just $4.11 a kilo from the farm in September last year, in some supermarkets is being sold for at least six times that price. Melon producers, when it comes to fruit and veg, were getting paid $1.50 a kilo, while the big two were selling them at $5 a kilo or more. If the price for meat and fruit and vegetables is going down at the farm gate, then families should be seeing cheaper prices on supermarket shelves too. But we're not seeing it. In January, after some pushback from farmers and ag groups, we saw the price of lamb drop significantly, despite an increase in the wholesale cost since then. So it's all over the place, and the numbers just don't add up. That's why I welcome the Albanese Labor government's ACCC inquiry into supermarket prices. We want to get to the bottom of it. We all want to know why a couple of kilos cost about the same as what a farmer might get for a whole lamb at the saleyard, and we don't want the usual spin. I expect the ACCC to use its powers to get some real answers. When the price of meat comes down at the supermarket, it drives demand, and that helps farmers out. When meat is overpriced, shoppers buy less, and farmers end up doing it tougher. Coles and Woolworths have recently defended their pricing, with Coles suggesting increased costs from suppliers and farmers. But the profit figures, the wholesale figures and the sale prices don't add up. Coles has purportedly even asked some of its suppliers to reduce their costs as inflation cools, but suppliers aren't necessarily seeing the record profits, unlike the big two supermarkets. Supermarkets are buying meat at record-low prices. But they're keeping checkout prices high, and that is driving up supermarket profits. Let me say this: profits are a good thing. They give a company confidence to invest, and profitable companies employ millions of Australians. But are excessive profits at a time when the country is battling inflation the best we can do? Shareholders of these big companies are essentially creaming it, and they're digging their fingers into the pockets of the people who shop at those supermarkets. If you're making more profit this year, in a high-inflation inflation environment, than you were last year, then you're contributing to inflation. It's not a good thing. Frankly, it's galling to see prices at the checkout go up when the price that supermarkets pay at the saleyard and the farm gate goes down. The supermarkets give every excuse—that it takes time, that there are middlemen. We've heard it all, and we are sick of it. I look forward to the inquiry getting to the bottom of it. Excessive profit might be good for shareholders, but it's not so great for customers, it's not good for farmers and it's not good for the national fight against inflation. My constituents have contacted my office, welcoming the news of the ACCC inquiry, including Noel from my electorate, who said: Farmers are not making big profits at all, but the supermarkets are unfairly asking them to lower prices so they can keep theirs. David in Carlton River said: It's funny how the Coalition, that includes the National Party, have never thought of trying to get a better deal for our farmers, seems like they don't practice what they preach. Mr BRIAN MITCHELL 129164 You can laugh, member for Hinkler. You are the mining company party now, not the farmers' party. Everybody knows that. You're the Gina party. We know that. When it comes to cost-of-living relief, there are things we can't control, which is why we've called for this inquiry. With the things we can control, I'm proud I'm part of a government not scared of making changes where necessary. Amending the stage 3 tax cuts was the right thing to do to help people keep more of what they earn. We are proud of wanting people to earn more and keep more of what they earn. Every Australian taxpayer will receive a tax cut from 1 July. Whether it's grocery price inquiries or putting more money into people's pockets through tax cuts, the Labor government is looking after Australians' best interests. Hinkler Electorate: Australia Day Awards and Honours, Paradise Dam 73 19:40 Mr PITT 148150 Hinkler Would you believe, Mr Deputy Speaker, that recently it was Australia Day? Around Australia Day our local councils give out awards to citizens, and there were many in both the Fraser Coast Regional Council area and Bundaberg. There were far too many to name, but I do want to call out a couple of them. The Young Citizen of the Year in Hervey Bay and Fraser Coast was George Rowland. I've spoken about George before. George suffers from dyslexia, and he's spent a lot of time getting support services into local schools, including the one that he attends. I think the award is a great reflection of the work George has done for the community. Brian Taylor was Volunteer of the Year at Fraser Coast. Brian is a very well-known local, particularly for his work at the Hervey Bay Historical Village and Museum. He's been a long-term volunteer there, and I've met him a number of times. Mr Deputy Speaker, I'll declare an interest when it comes to the awarding of Citizen of the Year in Bundaberg to Craig Holden. Back when we were both thinner, younger and better looking—although I think Craig is probably still all of those things—we shared a house at university. I think the best way to describe Craig's win is in the words of his wife, Christine. Christine put up a post on Facebook, and I'd like to read it. She wrote: Australia Day 2024 "Citizen of the Year" award for Craig. He's being very humble but he has dedicated and volunteered a large portion of his life/free time to the lifesaving community locally, state wide and nationally. He will never see what he does as anything special but when you start on this journey as a 7 year old then pass on your passion for the next … years you truly are deserving of "Citizen of the Year" not just this year but every year. Christine goes on to say that she has been awarded '2024 domestic goddess' and that she is humbled to accept this award for her outstanding mowing skills. She thanks her husband, Craig, and says she is looking forward to her framed certificate. On behalf of the people of Hinkler, I sent a thankyou card to Christine and awarded her the domestic goddess award, and of course I sent one to Craig and others. Congratulations to them both. They're both really well-known in local surf lifesaving circles. The entire family, in fact, including their kids and their parents, have been heavily involved for a long time. It's a very well-deserved award. To move on to more serious matters, the debacle surrounding Paradise Dam, near my home town of Bundaberg, is an absolute outrage. The fact is that this dam now won't be repaired, and the suggestion is to build a new wall because that's the engineering requirement. In fact, it's suggested that they have to go through all the approval processes again. Yet the plan, when you look at statements from Sunwater and others, is to build the wall some 70 metres in front of the existing one. That's on the existing apron, from what I can recall. How is that different? The dam will have the same profile and the same holding capacity and will cover the same footprint. I don't get that at all. I'm concerned, as are the people I represent, about what happens to the money. We committed, with then Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce, the member for New England, $600 million towards this project because it is critical for water security in my region. I wrote to the minister. I received a response from the acting branch head of water grid infrastructure investment. In that response there's a very concerning paragraph. It says: 'The government is focused on improving water security for all Australians, particularly in regional areas such as Bundaberg, while being economically responsible and still protecting the environment and our cultural heritage.' What difference will it make if it's the same dam with the same footprint, the same height and the same amount of water? What possible other outcome could you have? They go on to say, 'It's a fundamentally different project than the Australian government committed to, so before any funding decisions are made the Australian government will need to carefully consider all available information provided by the Queensland government, noting no proposal to construct a new dam wall has been brought forward to date.' It has been three years—three years!—since there was a decision made, and we now have correspondence from the minister's department effectively suggesting that there's no money. The people in my region will be watching this very closely, and we'll be watching the next budget to see if that $600 million disappears to something else, because it absolutely should not. It was a solemn promise, and I recall the then opposition committing to it. For the record, I seek leave to present this letter so that the people of my electorate are aware of it and they know what it says. Leave granted. Mr PITT 148150 I thank the House. Medicare 74 19:45 Mr NEUMANN HVO Blair Medicare as we know it today was first introduced by former prime minister Bob Hawke 40 years ago. But it was Bill Hayden, my former federal MP, who, as social security minister in the Whitlam Labor government, introduced its forerunner, Medibank, in the 1970s, before the Fraser coalition government dismantled it. So we have past Labor governments to thank for introducing Medicare and delivering better health care in this country, and it's been left to another Labor government, the Albanese Labor government, to strengthen Medicare and set it up for the next generation. To mark the 40th birthday of Medicare, I popped into the Ipswich Medicare Urgent Care Clinic, which I was proud to open in August last year, delivering on a really important commitment I made to the people of Ipswich and surrounds at the last election. It was great to get back to tour the clinic and thank the amazing staff for the valuable work they do, ably led by the Dr Ajit Bhalla. This vital service is making it easier for local families to get bulk-billed care close to home when they need it, which is reducing out-of-pocket costs and helping with cost-of-living pressures for people in the fast-growing Ipswich region. All they need is a Medicare card. It's been a roaring success, with over 3,100 presentations since it opened in August, an average of 40 patients a day and at least nine out of 10 people saying they'd recommend the service. The urgent care clinic is taking pressure off the Ipswich Hospital emergency department, with presentations there down 25 per cent, freeing up the hardworking ED doctors and nurses to focus on saving lives. I've been fighting for years to improve access to health care for people in my area, so I'm proud that the government has delivered this much-needed service. When it comes to Medicare generally, locals in Blair are agreeing and seeing the benefits of the government's record investments in bulk-billing. More than 105,000 patients in Blair have been able to access a bulk-billing doctor since November last year, with the government's tripling of the bulk-billing incentive for GPs helping with cost-of-living pressure. It means more children, pensioners and healthcare card holders in my community find it easier to see a bulk-billing doctor than they have for decades. It also means that more than 50 local practices that bulk-bill are getting more government support for their vital services. As a result of this much needed boost, the nationwide bulk-billing rate has risen, with an estimated 360,000 additional trips to the GP being bulk-billed. This has saved Australians more than $15 million in GP gap fees in November and December alone. Regional and rural Australians like my constituents have benefited the most, with an estimated 202,000 free visits to the GP in two months. These savings come on top of $1.6 million that patients in Blair have saved on 137,562 scripts that are cheaper as a result of Labor's cheaper medicines policy, including 11,051 60-day prescriptions, which is saving people time and money. In addition, our government delivered on another key election commitment to strengthen GP practices last year, with 39 local practices in my electorate sharing more than a million dollars in grant funding to improve their services and patient access. Lastly, the Albanese government is making it easier for GP practices in the outer suburbs and regional areas to recruit more doctors to service my local community. Thanks to another Labor election commitment, the rural Rosewood GP catchment area in my electorate was given distribution priority area, or DPA, status in July 2022. While these changes were good for some clinics, which are now able to access foreign-trained doctors, others, like the Walloon Medical Centre, are still classified as metropolitan under other classification systems, like the department of health's Modified Monash Model, making it harder to attract GPs to work long term at this practice. This is why the Minister for Health and Aged Care recently announced the Working Better for Medicare Review to look at how we better distribute doctors and healthcare workers around the country. It will include the three main policy levers used to distribute them: the Modified Monash Model, the District of Workforce Shortage and DPA. The review will identify ways to have a more stable and better located workforce, particularly in areas that find it difficult to attract and retain doctors, so that all Australians can access the care they need when they need it, regardless of where they live. Our Medicare-strengthening reforms have been a win all round for patients, doctors and the health system in Blair, and they're helping make sure Medicare is stronger than ever after a decade of cuts and neglect under the coalition, especially under the current Leader of the Opposition, who was arguably the worst health minister, and he tried to put a co-payment on all visits to the GP. First Nations Australians 75 19:50 Ms STEGGALL 175696 Warringah Today we mark the 16th anniversary of the national apology to Australia's Indigenous people. As we mark this anniversary, I acknowledge the Ngunnawal and Ngambri elders of the Canberra region, where parliament gathers, and I also acknowledge the traditional custodians of my area in Warringah. Their names remain contested, but they are part of the longest-surviving culture in the world, and the area is rich in heritage. I acknowledge too their sorrow and the cost of sharing this land. I commit myself to genuine healing, and I acknowledge that the land was never ceded. The national apology was a milestone event in Australia that was met with generosity from First Nations people, but today I must say the ceremony was a little sad. As we reflect on last year's referendum outcome, I remain committed to the Uluru statement, especially the truth-telling, particularly about the stolen generation and the ongoing impacts of government policies. We also received the Closing the Gap annual report and the annual plan here in parliament today. A review by the Productivity Commission shows that the current approach is not working. The report made four important recommendations: the need to share power, to recognise and support Indigenous data sovereignty, to fundamentally rethink mainstream government systems and culture, and to implement stronger accountability. We are not listening to our First Nations people. We cannot close the gaps and further our national journey of reconciliation if we do not listen, so it's heartening to hear the government commit today to making structural changes to the way they work, interact and walk alongside First Nations communities. There must be genuine partnership and active listening. I welcome the establishment of a National Commissioner for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children and Young People. We need to focus more on the rights of the child in how we craft policies and laws at the federal level. This is especially true for First Nations children. Pick any statistic and you can see why. Data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showed that suicide accounted for 27 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children's deaths in 2022. I understand, sadly, that that rose following the sense of rejection from the outcome of the referendum. A third of those children were aged between 15 and 17. That is tragic. The commissioner can help turn around such appalling, sombre statistics by advocating for those most at risk of taking their own lives. I welcome the immediate assistance of $96 million in grants to frontline First Nations organisations assisting First Nations women and children affected by domestic violence. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women are three times more likely to experience violence than non-Indigenous women, 11 times more likely to die due to assault and 34 times more likely to be hospitalised as a result of that violence. I share the enthusiasm of the government that our First Nations people can contribute to the transition to renewable energy as well, noting we already have major First Nations involvement in renewable energy. They have been custodians of this land for so many years, and they did so in a manner that had such a lesser impact than the one we have imposed on this land. So I look forward to seeing the First Nations Clean Energy Strategy that Minister Bowen is currently developing. With the Voice referendum being unsuccessful a few months ago, we must chart a new course in the spirit of reconciliation and walking hand in hand with our First Nations people. In that spirit, I take responsibility for Warringah. My office is committing to enacting a reconciliation action plan, and I urge other MPs and businesses to do the same if they haven't already. It will put a focus on four core pillars to provide tangible benefits to our First Nations people in the electorate of Warringah: relationships, respect, opportunities and governance, to act and to walk with First Nations people in Warringah and around the country. As a country, we have become far better at acknowledging our Indigenous heritage, and at celebrating it. However, I still feel the defeat of the Voice to Parliament last October in the Referendum. It shows we have a long way to go, especially in truth-telling and in acknowledging our history, its conflicts and the cost that First Nations Australians have borne. We say of Australia that it is the lucky country. I think we are lucky, in that we have the privilege of having the oldest living continuous culture in the world—some 65,000 years. It enriches us and makes us better. But we're still far from truly recognising it, acknowledging it, learning from it and respecting it. Middle East 76 19:55 Ms PAYNE 144732 Canberra This week Israel has launched attacks on Rafah, where around 1.4 million people, about half of Gaza's population, have fled trying to find safety. They were told to go there to be safe, but now they are subject to air strikes and an impending ground offensive. This must stop. We need an immediate ceasefire. We need an end to the sickening, indiscriminate killing in Gaza. The scale of unmitigated destruction in Gaza is simply unfathomable. Entire neighbourhoods have been levelled. Entire families have been killed. I have met with Palestinians here in Canberra who have lost 30 or 45 family members. Others are in constant fear for their loved ones. A devastating new acronym has emerged in Gaza's hospitals: WCNSF—wounded child, no surviving family. How many WCNSFs will there be before this ends? The health system has collapsed, and this affects not only those injured but everyone else too—for example, cancer patients who cannot access treatment and people in need of life-saving medication, such as children with diabetes. People are starving. An estimated 28,000 civilians have been killed, two-thirds of whom are women and children. I want to make something very clear. It is that to criticise or even to question the Israeli government is not antisemitism. Antisemitism is abhorrent and should have no place anywhere, ever—full stop. But it is right that the international community question and monitor any government that is engaging in military action, particularly when civilians are being killed—in particular, at the scale we are seeing in Gaza. Israelis have the right to live in peace and be safe from terrorist attacks such as the vile attacks carried out on 7 October. Of course Israel has a right to defend itself, but what we are seeing in Gaza at the moment is not self-defence. Children are not terrorists. We must be concerned by the language that has been used by Israeli government members—language such as, 'We will eliminate everything,' and much worse that I won't repeat. We must question what Prime Minister Netanyahu means by the 'absolute victory' that he says is within reach. We must be concerned when he reaffirms his position that there should never be a Palestinian state. There must be a Palestinian state. That is the fundamental human right of the Palestinian people, a resilient people who will never give up on the aim, the simple thing that so many of us are lucky enough to take for granted every day: living in peace and freedom under the umbrella of statehood. The two-state solution and the recognition of Palestine stand firm in Labor's platform and are both things I will always support, but this will not be possible if we see the complete destruction of Gaza, which is what we are seeing right now. Last month, the International Court of Justice put Israel on notice, saying that it must take all measures within its power to prevent its troops from committing genocide and that it must take steps to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza. It is right that the international community is applying this scrutiny, and I note that our government has stressed this decision is binding on Israel. This brings me to the importance of humanitarian aid in Gaza, to which Australia has committed $46.5 million since October. Many in my community have written to me about our government's decision to pause additional funding to UNRWA in response to allegations about staff in the organisation. I share my community's deep concern about any disruption to aid in Gaza at this critical time. UNRWA does life-saving work and, at the moment, more than 1.4 million Palestinians are sheltering in their facilities. I want to assure people that the pause has been applied only to the recently announced additional $6 million and does not affect Australia's annual core funding of $20.6 million, which has already been provided for this financial year. The House transcript was published up to 20:00. The remainder of the transcript will be published progressively as it is completed. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mrs Andrews ) took the chair at 16:00.

Tuesday, 13 February 2024

The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mrs Andrews ) took the chair at 16:00.

 

CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS 78 CONSTITUENCY STATEMENTS Middle East 78 16:00 Dr SCAMPS 299623 Mackellar The barbaric attacks on the people of Israel of 7 October shocked and horrified the people of Mackellar. Our hearts broke for the affected families and the people of Israel. The earnest hope and call still is for all hostages to be reunited with their families. In recent months I have also received an enormous amount of correspondence from people in Mackellar about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza—far more than for any other issue since I was elected. The nearly 1,000 emails from Mackellar constituents expressed deep distress at the ongoing and deteriorating humanitarian crisis in Gaza and horror as the death toll steadily rises, thousands upon thousands. In these letters, constituents implore me to urge our government to use our country's respected voice to call unambiguously and strongly for a ceasefire, to call for the killing of civilians and children to stop and to call for Israel to ensure that adequate levels of aid reach the people of Gaza to prevent the real risk of more people dying every day from starvation, dehydration and exposure. I worry how often such calls for a ceasefire or criticism of Israel's military actions are misconstrued or mislabelled as attacks on Jewish people. They are not. It is humanitarianism, not antisemitism, and no government should be above being held to account. It is possible to hold two truths in your heart at the same time—in this case, a deep concern for the people, and the plight, of Israel and a desperation to see the killing of innocent people and children in Gaza stopped immediately. The preliminary ruling of the International Court of Justice that there is a plausible case of genocide for Israel to answer is extremely grave. So I thank the Albanese government for their repeated assertions that the way Israel defends itself matters. I welcome Australia's comments in support of the ICJ that it plays a critical role in upholding international humanitarian law. I welcomed Australia's vote last December in the UN General Assembly calling for a humanitarian ceasefire and an immediate release of hostages. But so much more needs to be done and urgently, particularly as we learn that thousands more are at risk of being killed in Rafah, where tens of thousands have crammed into this small area as the only supposed remaining safe place in Gaza. So I urge the government to again call strongly for an immediate ceasefire, and I urge the government immediately to resume financial support for UNRWA. I urge the government to call Israel to not proceed with its planned military assault in Rafah. I thank all the people who have written to me for not looking the other way. (Time expired) Mahmoud, Dr Olfat 78 16:03 Ms KEARNEY LTU Cooper It is with a heavy heart that I inform the House of the death of a great woman, activist, nurse and friend, Dr Olfat Mahmoud. Dr Mahmoud was a second-generation Palestinian refugee. She was a descendant of the Christian and Muslim people who fled their beloved homeland in 1948 to live in the refugee camps in Lebanon after the founding of the State of Israel. Olfat was born in that refugee camp. She faced incredible challenges her whole life. She endured and survived the unfettered violence of Sabra and Shatila in 1982. It was in the aftermath of that that she came into contact with volunteer nurses—Australian Nursing and Midwifery members, actually—who were giving their time and skills to care for the refugees in the camps. These nurses formed the origins of APHEDA-Union Aid Abroad, an organisation auspiced by the ACTU. Its mission is a passionate commitment to global justice, peace and equality. Another wonderful woman, Dr Helen McHugh, was one of those nurses, and it was her experiences in those refugee camps that ignited a fire in her belly to start APHEDA. Dr Mahmoud saw the care provided by those nurses, especially to women and their children, and she wanted to help—to help her own people. She came to Australia in 1986 on a community nurse training program run by APHEDA. She desperately wanted to take those skills back to Lebanon and care for the Palestinian refugees in her community, and that is exactly what she did. In 1993, Dr Mahmoud established the important Palestinian Women's Humanitarian Organization. After gaining a doctorate in psychology and teaching in this area, she published a book about her refugee story, Tears for Tashiha, in 2018, referring to her family's home town, which she was never permitted to return to. She undertook many speaking tours advocating for the rights of Palestinians. Dr Mahmoud, my dear friend Olfat, showed exceptional leadership, courage and bravery throughout her life, and she will be greatly missed. She died, after a long battle with cancer, on 24 September last year. Olfat would be deeply distressed by the unfettered and abhorrent violence in Gaza. She would agree with the United Nations's highest legal body, the ICJ, who found that 'the situation in Gaza is catastrophic' and that 'Israel should do everything in its power to avoid killing innocent Palestinians, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, creating intolerable living conditions in Gaza or deliberately preventing Palestinian births.' In a joint statement with New Zealand, Australia's foreign minister noted that the decisions of the ICJ are binding and we do expect Israel to act in accordance with the ICJ's ruling, including to enable the provision of basic services and humanitarian assistance. Dr Mahmoud is survived by her husband, four boys and two grandchildren—third- and fourth-generation Palestinian refugees. Vale and rest in peace. (Time expired) Hughes Electorate: Australia Day Awards, Hughes Electorate: Roads 79 16:06 Ms WARE 300123 Hughes It's a privilege for me to rise to congratulate all of those in my electorate of Hughes who were honoured in the Australia Day honours list this year. They are: Ms Sheree Bourke OAM, of Bonnet Bay, for service to education, including as a science teacher at Menai High School and relieving principal at Tempe High School as well as for her work with the school district displays competition and awards at the Sydney Royal Easter Show; and Mrs Rita Taylor OAM, of Heathcote, for service to surf lifesaving. Mrs Taylor is a club historian and life member of Garie Surf Life Saving Club, having been involved in the club since 1956. There are Ms Rebecca Rowan ACM, of Engadine, in recognition of distinguished service by an operational member of a civilian corrections service; Ms Rosemary Bourke PSM, of Sutherland, for outstanding public service in the implementation and running of the COVID-19 vaccination program and special health accommodation pharmacy support for the NSW Department of Health; and Mr Graeme Loy PSM, of Oyster Bay, for outstanding public service to healthcare, particularly the delivery of COVID-19 related services and including as Chief Executive of Western Sydney Local Health District. Congratulations to all of you. You have all made significant contributions to our community in your individual areas of expertise. While I know that you do not seek recognition, I am delighted to be able to provide that in this place. I turn now to another major issue in my electorate: the state of Heathcote Road and the decision by the federal government and the federal Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government to dump coalition plans to commence the feasibility and planning studies for its duplication. Heathcote Road is 24 kilometres in length. It's a major Sydney artery in the south, connecting Western Sydney to the Sutherland Shire and the Illawarra. Thirty-six thousand people travel on this road every day, going to work, taking children to school and moving building materials to construction sites. For the most part it's a single-lane road. People across the electorate continually raise with me Heathcote Road's safety and congestion. Hundreds have signed my online petition. In the lead-up to the 2022 election, I helped secure $17.5 million to commence the planning work for the duplication in its entirety. That funding has now been cancelled by Labor, cancelled by the infrastructure minister, with no rational reason why. I also thank Chris O'Keefe from radio station 2GB for helping me champion the cause for my local community, many of whom are his listeners. I call upon the Albanese Labor government and federal Infrastructure Minister King to stop playing politics with the lives of those in the shire, Sydney's south and the south-west. Restore funding for the duplication of Heathcote Road. Western Australia: Cost of Living, Wishnowsky, Mr Mitchell (Mitch), Putt, Mr Alisdair Edward 79 16:09 Mr KEOGH 249147 Burt The Albanese and the Cook Labor governments are both committed to easing cost-of-living pressures for our community. That's why, last week, we introduced legislation that will see every Australian taxpayer receive a tax cut. It's why we are working together to ease energy bills with rebates over summer, meaning more people can afford to use their air conditioning. And it is why, at the beginning of this month, free public transport for students getting to and from school was introduced. The cost of public transport for school students really does add up. The WA Labor government has run the numbers and estimates that families will save more than $500 on getting their kids to and from school thanks to this measure. This will make a massive difference for families in our community. The Albanese Labor government is working with the WA Labor government on our No. 1 priority—easing cost-of-living pressures. I want to give a very special shout-out to one of our own: Gosnells local Mitch Wishnowsky, who took to the Super Bowl pitch yesterday as part of the San Francisco 49ers team. Mitch was called into action early in the game, punting the ball some 54 yards—50 metres, for those of us familiar with that. It was helpful that he started out his football career at our local Huntingdale Junior Football Club. He put in a real MVP performance. And while the outcome was no 'love story', I am sure he'll 'shake it off'. I'd like to take this opportunity to pay my respects to my friend Alisdair Putt, who passed away last month undertaking the World's Toughest Row competition, rowing across the Atlantic Ocean. His team were taking part in the six-week challenge to raise money for the Veterans Transition Centre in Western Australia that supports both veterans and their families with respite and transition. He was skippering a four-man rowing team made up of current and former defence personnel when he suffered a medical episode. Alisdair was a pretty amazing person. He was a former intelligence agent, a Navy reserve officer, a former prosecutor and a war crime investigator. I was fortunate enough to work with Alisdair at the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions. He was a principal legal officer, well experienced, and I was a fresh-faced, new legal officer, but Alisdair was always generous with his time, free-flowing with the anecdotes of his experience both in the law and in many other roles he had performed. In one particular case, where he led me—a massive case for me to work on at such a junior level—he was such a great guide in helping me develop my experience as a prosecutor. Alisdair's funeral was held on Monday, and there was, deservedly, a huge crowd in attendance. My condolences go to his family. Vale, Alisdair Putt. Rest in peace. Mallee Electorate: Bushfires 80 16:12 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I rise this afternoon because there is a severe natural disaster occurring in my patch this afternoon. We have catastrophic conditions and fires from the Grampians area, with risks right up to Wyperfeld National Park. For those who live in that region, there is a lot of fear and anxiety. Many have left their homes now, under advice from Vic Emergency. I think it's important that, in this House, we keep our feet firmly grounded on why we are here—to stand up for our communities. These conditions that are currently occurring across Victoria, with high winds up to 80 kilometres an hour, are not expected to abate until later tonight. The risks are high. There are many families who are now homeless. There are dry thunderstorms happening, with lightning strikes which have occurred overnight. Incredibly strangely, a freight train going from Adelaide to Melbourne last night started six fires as it was travelling through my electorate. We in this House can't solve natural disasters but we can certainly reach out and support and be there to represent our communities, and that is my aim this afternoon. I am thinking of those who live in the beautiful Grampians National Park area, Dadswell Bridge, Pomonal—who have evacuated—Bellfield, Wartook and Roses Gap. Even the Western Highway is now closed between Horsham and Deep Lead, near Stawell. So much of the southern part of Mallee is now in the warning area for fire. Can I urge anyone who happens to be on their social app and sees this: please, be constantly alerted by the emergency.vic.gov.au app and the warnings that are being provided. The ABC, of course, is providing up-to-date information as well. I think of the councils and have reached out to them to let me know what can be provided, and I'm really pleased to say that the Minister for Emergency Management, Murray Watt, has already reached out with anything that he can provide. This is what we do in this House. This is bipartisan. We want our communities to know that they are loved and they are being watched over. Wills Electorate: Glenroy Post Office 80 16:15 Mr KHALIL 101351 Wills I rise today to address a matter of great concern to my constituents and my local community, and that's the closure of the Glenroy post office. Nearly six months ago, I stood before this very chamber and expressed my shock and dismay, and the shock and dismay felt by the people of Glenroy, at the decision made by Australia Post—without any consultation or transparency—to close the local post office. Since then, all the efforts to reverse the decision have been met with a degree of frustration and, frankly, disappointment. The Glenroy post office is not just a place of business; it's a vital provider of essential services and support for those in our community. Its closure will have far-reaching consequences for the people of Glenroy, particularly for the elderly and disabled members of our community. Despite repeated attempts to engage with Australia Post, our concerns have been dismissed and calls for reconsideration have fallen on deaf ears. I wrote in December to Ms Siobhan McKenna, the chair of Australia Post, and I outlined the concerns of my constituents regarding the closure of Glenroy post office; yet, to this day, I have not received a response. The closure of the Glenroy post office is not merely a logistical inconvenience; it is a denial of basic rights and a betrayal of trust. It's a stark reminder of the systemic barriers faced by the most vulnerable members of our community, because Glenroy post office provided access for the elderly and those with disability. It had suitable disability access: it was in a flat location, with a wide entrance and a wheelchair access ramp. Many of the alternative locations which Australia Post has put forward do not meet these standards and do not meet the standards and guidelines outlined in the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, which was, of course, proudly passed under the Paul Keating Labor government. So, without urgent compliance with the act at these alternative sites, the closure of the Glenroy post office has discriminatory effects on the elderly and the disabled community in my electorate. Many of these alternative locations are also, frankly, inaccessible via public transport, which is needed by those community members. Australia Post has also refused to grant a licence to an alternative provider, a newsagent in Glenroy, which is also a deeply disappointing decision because it was an alternative solution. I again publicly ask, as I asked in my letter, that Australia Post reconsider their refusal to grant a licence to the local Glenroy provider. The decision to close Glenroy post office and the subsequent treatment of this issue by Australia Post is, frankly, deeply disappointing. So today I am also urging any colleagues—and this is a bipartisan thing—who have received any constituent concerns to reach out to me so that together we can send a clear message to Australia Post: the needs of our communities must not be ignored. Live Animal Exports 81 16:18 Mr RICK WILSON 198084 O'Connor I rise today to update the House on the status of live animal exports to Israel since the 7 October Hamas invasion and on how Australia continues to deliver an important source of food security to the Middle East. According to LiveCorp, the value of Australia's live sheep export trade to the Middle East is $143 million, and it supports around 3,500 regional jobs, mostly in my electorate of O'Connor. In 2023, live sheep exports to Israel were up fourfold on the previous year, and WA live exporters continued to successfully ship consignments to Israel and the broader Middle East. Unfortunately, the voyage of the MV Bahijah has proved an exception, and there must be serious questions asked of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry as to why this shipment was approved in the first place. While Israeli importer Bassem Dabbah has imported into Israel in the past, it appears nonsensical that the safety of an Israeli consignment via the Red Sea was not questioned by DAFF. I state for the record that no-one disputes that the rerouting of the Bahijah away from the threat of Houthi rebel attack near the Red Sea was the safest option to protect human and animal life. But the fact that the contingency discharge destination for the Bahijah was also deemed unsafe only reinforces the poor judgement that DAFF exercised in permitting this ill-fated voyage. After the exporter voluntarily rerouted the Bahijah towards South Africa on 16 January, DAFF explored the viability of multiple exporter applications to reroute. But, on 20 January, DAFF directed theBahijahto return to Fremantle port, arriving on 29 January 2024. Questions must be asked of DAFF as to why, on arrival in Fremantle in the midst of a heatwave, there was no clear plan for either the offloading or the reshipping of livestock aboard theBahijah. It has recently come to light that DAFF decision-making was confounded by the intervention of animal activists. Animals Australia had lodged multiple submissions to DAFF while publicly peddling fake news, posting historical photographs superimposed on land temperatures of up to 41 degrees, fabricating animal suffering that is simply not happening. Only yesterday DAFF reported that 'the department continues to receive daily updates from the veterinarian aboard the vessel, and the livestock remain in good condition'. Meanwhile, in Israel, animal activists are seeking a court injunction to prevent theBahijah from discharging, should it ever reach its desired destination. DAFF have admitted that these actions and uncertainties confounded and delayed their decision-making process. Ultimately, DAFF ordered theBahijah to be unloaded, with livestock to be held in a registered live-export feedlot, pending a final decision. This raises the obvious question of how much suffering animal activists are willing to create in order to achieve their ideological goals of ending not only live animal export but commercial livestock production in general. One thing that has become clear throughout this entireBahijah episode, now clocking up its 39th day, is that our animal welfare standards do work and are leading the world. Murphy, Ms Samantha, Medicare 81 16:21 Ms CATHERINE KING 00AMR Ballarat I start with the obviously very tragic event in my community over the last six days, the disappearance of Samantha Murphy, a 51-year-old mum who is known to many across the community of Ballarat. The police investigation is continuing, and I do want to say thank you very much to VicPol and to the SES, the CFA and council workers as well as the many volunteers across our community who have done all that they can as part of that. I know it's an incredibly distressing circumstance for Samantha's family and those who love her. On 1 February, it was the 40th anniversary of Medicare. It's one of the crowning achievements of federal Labor, and it's perhaps one of the most significant social reforms in our nation's history. Forty years on, Medicare is as important to Australians today as it was in 1984. On Medicare's birthday, I was lucky enough to visit the Ballarat urgent care clinic to celebrate this achievement with the wonderful care staff and the former member for Ballarat, now in his 90s, John Mildren. John was the member while the Medicare legislation was debated, passed and finally implemented as one of the first major reforms of the Hawke government. It was a privilege to hear the stories he had to share about the history of Medicare through that time. What he emphasised was that Medicare was not something that was easy. Its passage was not without controversy and it faced significant resistance from the opposition as well as from doctor groups. But what John told us was why it had to be done. It may seem alien to us today, but John told us of constantly needing to assist constituents, in the same electorate office I am in now, like mums who fell a couple of dollars short of the then very low safety net—you either had the safety net or you could afford private health insurance, and if you were in the middle there was nothing available to you other than paying by private means—who were in absolute distress and tears because they could not afford access to care for their babies. It seems extraordinary today that that was the circumstance faced by MPs such as us. Not only did Medicare give all Australians the care they needed but it gave us our dignity. I'm proud to be part of a government now which is just as committed to Medicare today as the Hawke government was then. I'm glad that, today, Australians do not face the same barriers to access affordable health care as they did when John was the member for Ballarat. But I also know that we should strive for more. There's a lot of work to be done, and we can't take affordable health care for granted. It's why we're committed to strengthening Medicare, providing better access to cheaper health care, cheaper medicines and affordable hospital treatment. In my electorate of Ballarat, there have been 6,000 extra bulk-billed consultations through October to December. That's a great achievement, but there is of course always more to be done. (Time expired) Dawson Electorate: Australia Day Honours and Awards 82 16:24 Mr WILLCOX 286535 Dawson Australia Day is a day to celebrate everything that's great about Australia. We celebrate our fortunate way of life, our values and our freedoms. There is no better way to recognise the people in our electorate of Dawson who hold these values every single day than the 2024 Australia Day Honours List. I rise today to congratulate the four individuals from our electorate who have been awarded these prestigious honours and to pay tribute to their commitment, dedication and service to our community and, indeed, our country. The recipients were Councillor Jan Clifford OAM, Mr Kenneth Martin OAM, Mr Colin Meng OAM and Warrant Officer Benjamin Kilgour CSM. Councillor Janet Clifford was awarded the Order of Australia Medal for her service to women in local government and to the community of the Whitsundays. My good friend Jan has dedicated 15 years of her life as a counsellor at Whitsunday Regional Council as well as being an active and passionate representative for multiple community organisations such as the Australian Local Government Women's Association, Rotary, the Mackay-Whitsunday branch of Regional Development Australia, PCYC, the Whitsunday Housing Company—and the list goes on. Mr Kenneth Martin was awarded the Order of Australia Medal for his service to community music. Now a life member, Mr Martin served as President of the Mackay Choral Society for 25 years and vice president for 16 years. During this time he was successful in securing grants to maintain their buildings and infrastructure, as well as taking to the stage many times, as he is a talented performer. Mr Colin Meng was awarded the Order of Australia Medal for his service to the community through a range of organisations. Col previously owned two businesses before becoming Mayor of the Mackay Regional Council. He has continued his community involvement while serving on multiple boards such as Mackay Hospital and Health Services and the Mackay Region Chamber of Commerce, just to name a couple. Last, but certainly not least, Warrant Officer Benjamin Kilgour, a fine Australian soldier, was awarded his Conspicuous Service Medal for his achievement as the senior enlisted advisor and operations warrant officer deployed to the headquarters of the Middle East on Operation Accordion from July 2022 to January 2023. The tireless dedication of each of these individuals should serve as inspiration to all of us. They should all be proud of what they've accomplished. Thank you for your service. Embrace Disability Group, Tumbatrek, Snowy Valleys Heroes, Pearce, Mrs Mary 83 16:27 Ms McBAIN 281988 Eden-Monaro I had the immense pleasure of helping to celebrate the achievements of a bunch of fantastic young people in Queanbeyan last Friday, all who completed their qualifications in hospitality training with Embrace Disability Group. Congratulations to Tara, Robbie, Jack, Ayden, Bryce, Abbilea and Emily, who have successfully completed their Certificate III in Hospitality through their traineeships at Jerrabomberra High School. Embrace Disability Group is really taking the lead in providing opportunities and delivering catering services in the Queanbeyan region while also creating social change. This team of culinary experts working alongside individuals living with disability use locally sourced produce to craft menus that tantalise the tastebuds and create unforgettable dining experiences. A big congratulations to all the students, and a big thank you to Matt Morrisey, Trish Deveau and the Embrace Disability Group for their commitment to students and for providing them the opportunity for skills development and empowerment. Over the weekend I had the opportunity to again take part in Tumbatrek, a privilege that I now have carrying on as the custodian of Tim Fischer's walking stick. Around 150 participants walked through the beauty of the region's landscape, including Paddys River Dam, Reef Creek and Duffers Gully, which is part of the Hume and Hovell track, as we head to the 200th anniversary of the Hume and Hovell expedition. The aim of the trek is to bring together community groups, all levels of government and businesses to talk about many things. We talked about tourism, bushwalking and other business opportunities for the region. I want to give a big shout-out to the years 11 and 12 Tumbarumba high School students who are doing the Kokoda trek and used this as an opportunity for training. Well done to Tumbarumba Rotary, especially Glenn McGrath, Grant Harris and Bruce Wright, for all you do in making those students ready for that trek. I recently wrote a letter of support for a remarkable community member, and it struck me that she deserves much more recognition for the work that she is doing. Zita Vafiopulous started a group called Snowy Valleys Heroes which is committed to preserving the memories of our Snowy veterans. Zita and the group have spent the past 14 months researching veterans from across the Snowy Valleys for inclusion in the first book, called Snowy Valleys' Heroes Book 1 1850-1920. They now have 3,603 veterans' comprehensive information on the men who enlisted from the region. The team have shown tremendous dedication in their quest to preserve the memories of Snowy veterans, and I congratulate Zita for all of her for work. Finally, I want to make a quick acknowledgement of and to thank the amazing Mrs Pearce. Mary Pearce has been teaching in our public schools for 50 years. Mrs Pearce, you are so loved, you are so knowledgeable and we are incredibly grateful for the impact you've had on so many families. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230886 In accordance with standing order 193, the time for members' constituency statements has concluded. BILLS 83 BILLS Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024, Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024 83

Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024

Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024

Second Reading 83 16:31 Ms STANLEY 265990 Werriwa I rise to make my contribution on the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024. The measures in this bill will take effect from 1 April 2024 or the day after the bill receives royal assent, whichever occurs later. This bill implements the increase to foreign investment fees announced in the 2023-24 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. It does this by increasing the maximum fee that can be imposed by regulation to $7 million to facilitate the increases being implemented by the regulations in schedule 2 of this bill. As a result of the bill, foreign investors who apply to purchase an established dwelling will have their fees tripled. Further, all property owners who purchase an Australian dwelling after 9 May 2017 and leave it empty will have their vacancy fees doubled. Finally, new purchasers of existing properties who leave them vacant will have their vacancy fees increased by six times as a result of the tripling of the application fee and the doubling of the vacancy fee. Application fees for new dwellings, vacant land, agricultural land, commercial land and business entities will remain unchanged. Regularly constituents come to me and complain about overseas investors, particularly when they leave their properties empty, and the potential issues, particularly in my part of the world, for homebuyers and for people seeking to rent when there are empty properties. The government puts the interests of Australians seeking to find somewhere to live or to buy their first home first. These changes are our way of doing something to make a difference in this space. Higher fees for the purchase of established homes, increased penalties for those that leave their properties vacant and strengthened compliance will help ensure that foreign investment in residential property in Australia is in our national interest. Importantly, application fees for new dwellings and vacant land remain unchanged. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill, which is also being debated today, amends the International Tax Agreements Act 1953 to clarify that foreign investment fees and similar state and territory property taxes prevail to the extent of any inconsistency with Australia's double-tax agreements. This will ensure that such fees can continue to be imposed on foreign nationals who purchase Australian property. This measure will have a retrospective effect, applying the relevant taxes that are payable on or after 1 January 2018. This time limitation broadly aligns with the statue-of-limitation periods under state legislation. I'm proud to stand on this side of the chamber to support the bills before us today, and I do so in the knowledge that the Treasurer is putting the interests of Australia and Australians first. This was demonstrated by the recently announced tax packages and is demonstrated again by this piece of legislation. I'm sure it will be welcomed by members of my community. I commend the bill to the House. 16:35 Ms COKER 263547 Corangamite At local markets and street stalls, people often share with me their stories about housing and the rapid population growth occurring right across my electorate of Corangamite in Victoria. They also voice their frustration at seeing so many empty homes across the region. These homes are left vacant while others struggle to keep a roof over their heads. The Albanese government understands that having a place to call home is important to Australians, to their wellbeing and to their capacity to reach their potential. This legislation tackles this issue, so I stand today to support the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024. This bill is making sure that foreign investment aligns with our government's agenda to lift the nation's supply of housing. It's also about making sure that we have more houses for more people. The people of my electorate have been calling for this, and our government is acting on their calls. This bill increases penalties for foreign investors who leave properties vacant. This reform will help ensure that foreign investment in residential property is in our national interest. At the same time, our Albanese government will cut application fees for foreign investment in build-to-rent projects to support the delivery of more homes across Australia. These changes, which were announced in the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, include a tripling of foreign investment fees for the purchase of established homes and a doubling of vacancy fees for all foreign owned dwellings purchased since 9 May 2017. Together, this means a sixfold increase in vacancy fees for future purchasers of established dwellings. But, of course, this is not to say that foreign investment is not welcomed. It is welcomed as long as it is in the best interests of Australian communities. Under the current framework, foreign nationals are generally barred from buying existing property but can do so in very limited circumstances, such as when they come to live here for work or study. When they leave the country, they're required to sell their property if they have not become a permanent resident. Our changes further encourage foreign nationals to buy new property. The higher fees for established dwellings will encourage foreign buyers to invest in new housing developments. The increased vacancy fees will encourage foreign investors to make their unused properties available to renters and, importantly, this will help create additional housing stock and jobs in the construction industry, and support economic growth. When passed, these measures will take effect from 1 April this year and, for many, this can't come soon enough. Our government recognises this, and we also recognise that over the past decade under the coalition governments, our housing market had lost its way. We know that, under former coalition governments, it was so much harder for Australians to enjoy a fair wage, put food on the table, do well at school, keep good health and own their own home. All the while, houses were left empty. That is not what our communities deserve, and that is why the Labor government is acting. With cost-of-living challenges facing all Australians, this bill signals our government's commitment to ensuring that people right across our nation have access to the dreams and ambitions of homeownership—a dream which has been the pillar of our national identity for decades. From post-war reconstruction, when the Chifley Labor government delivered the nation's first-ever federal housing policy, to the housing policies of Whitlam, Hawke, Keating, Rudd and Gillard, Labor leaders understood that owning your own home was the key to a rewarding life—a life well lived. Under their leadership, owning a home became the foundation of our new national story. It was the heart of iconic TV shows, like The Sullivans and Neighbours. And who can forget the classic Australian drama The Castle, which told the story of homeownership and the great Australian dream to own your own home. It told this story to the world. But, over the past two decades, former coalition governments have systematically closed the door on homeownership for so many Australians and dismantled this key component of our national identity. 'Tell 'em they're dreaming,' was the coalition's message to Australians who dreamed of owning their own home. Previous coalition governments were more than happy to leave homes empty across the nation while hardworking Australians went without. We know that, because of the inaction of the former Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government, under them, outright homeownership rates dropped significantly. This inaction was fuelled by infighting and leadership squabbles, which were aptly showcased in last night's Nemesis program on the ABC. This bill is all about changing that reality. It will help to reshape our housing market by further bolstering our ambitious housing agenda. It's an agenda that includes $10 billion in the Housing Australia Future Fund to build 30,000 new homes in its first five years; a new national target to build 1.2 million well-located homes; a $3 billion new homes bonus; a $500 million housing support program; and a $2 billion social housing accelerator to deliver around 4,000 new social homes across Australia. And there's more. There's our National Housing Accord, which includes federal funding to deliver 10,000 affordable homes over five years from 2024; an investment of an extra $1 billion into the National Housing Infrastructure Facility to support more homes; up to $575 million in funding already unlocked from the national housing reconstruction facility, with homes under construction across the country; and an increase in the maximum rate of Commonwealth rent assistance by 15 per cent, the largest increase in more than 30 years. And it doesn't stop there. There are new incentives to boost support for rental housing by changing arrangements for investment in build-to-rent accommodation; a $1.7 billion one-year extension of the National Housing and Homelessness Agreement with states and territories, including a $67.5 million boost to homelessness funding over the next year; the development of a new national housing and homelessness plan; and, finally, a better deal for renters, which the states and territories have agreed to implement. Through this suite of measures, the bill I stand in support of today, we are making a real difference for so many Australians looking to buy a home of their own. For example, our Home Guarantee Scheme has seen more than 100,000 people able to secure a home since it was passed in May 2022. This is important progress but we recognise more needs to be done, and that's what this bill and our ambitious housing agenda is all about. On this side of the House, we recognise that a home of our own represents security, opportunity and prosperity. These principles are foundations for the Australian way of life, and homeownership is the key. I understand this, and our government understands this. We know that people young and old across the nation are worried about the supply of housing. We want to see more Australians in a position to enter the housing market, and we want to see all Australians with a roof over their head. That's why I support this bill, and it's also why I voice my support for the Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024. This bill works in tandem with the foreign acquisitions bill. It will clarify the uncertainty associated with the interaction between foreign investment fees and similar state and territory property taxes and Australia's double tax agreements. It also clarifies foreign investment fees and similar imposts to ensure they prevail over the double tax agreements. This will provide certainty that such fees continue to be imposed. In closing, these reforms are about strengthening our housing market for local communities. Our government understands that, with local and national leadership, cooperation with the states and industry and the right housing policies, we can make a difference in the medium and the long term. Together, we can put Australian interests first and ensure Australians benefits from foreign investment in Australia. Importantly, we can breathe life back into the great Australian story of homeownership. I commend the bills to the House. 16:44 Mr WOLAHAN 235654 Menzies I acknowledge I'm not on the list; the member for Kennedy is. I think it's only fair that I channel him just for a few moments while the minister is here! He hasn't sent me the talking points, but I would have loved to have heard what he had to say on this issue. While the minister is here, I would like the opportunity to briefly address this topic of homeownership. It is one that is becoming increasingly important in our country, particularly for those who are in suburban seats, because the cost of housing is becoming prohibitive. What we know is that, when we look at the median wage of Australians—not just the average, but the median wage—it is becoming out of reach for Australians to afford a home of their own. Many Australians will say: 'Of course, very few people buy a house on their own. They're part of a household. Couples usually buy a house.' That's true. So let's take the median wage, which is halfway. If we had 10 Australians, it's the person in the middle. There are two of them together looking to buy a house. In metropolitan Melbourne, where my seat is, there are 354 suburbs. What we know is that a household that is a couple on the median wage looking to buy the median house can afford zero—none of those suburbs. They're completely priced out. Then you would say, 'Manage your expectations. What about a unit?' and it is 15 out of 354 suburbs that are open to that household. Government members interjecting— Mr WOLAHAN 235654 We are letting young Australians down. We are letting the next generation of homeowners down. There are interjections coming across. I can't hear them all, but I'll be upfront: this is not a partisan issue. All parties are to blame for this. This has occurred over many years. We can do better on homeownership. We must do better on this particular bill. It comes down to enforcement— The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230886 I'm going to interrupt the member. The member for Bruce? Mr Hill 86256 I just wondered whether I could make an intervention under standing order 66A, and invite the member perhaps to address if homeownership is so important why he's not supporting the Help to Buy Scheme, which would make a real and immediate difference. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230886 I ask the member if he is prepared to take the intervention. Mr WOLAHAN 235654 I am prepared to take the interjection— Mr Hill 86256 No, it's an intervention, so now I get 30 seconds. Mr WOLAHAN 235654 Go for it! Mr Hill 86256 I won't use it all. I'd agree with your last comment that the concern for homeownership is felt across the parliament. We represent metro areas, but it's also an issue in rural and regional Australia, quite shockingly so—the minister's home state of Tasmania, for instance. But it does seem like political partisan posturing to say these fine words when the Liberal Party, the National Party and the Greens political party are deliberately holding up the government's commitment in the Help to Buy Scheme. I'd invite you, if you're serious about it, to address why you won't support this legislation and let it progress through the parliament. Mr WOLAHAN 235654 I'll take the interjection. We have now seen a partisan interjection. When we look for serious solutions to a serious problem—those were fine words that the Prime Minister used in 2012—then we get talking points. We get a scheme that is not designed to actually lift homeownership. It's designed to say that the government will have a seat at the dining table and own your property. That will create enormous complexities. We know when households and couples are required to buy a home the sad reality is many of those relationships break down. If a party to that relationship is the government, how is that dealt with? How is that going to play out through the courts? Whether it's the HAFF or this scheme, we are seeing talking points driving the potential for us to do better. We need to move away from the talking points and actually solve the problem. I'm from the seat of Menzies. It's named after Robert Menzies. We heard the comment made that the Liberal Party hasn't done much for homeownership. It was under Robert Menzies that homeownership saw the greatest increase. In 1949, homeownership rates were at 53 per cent. When he left office in 1966 they were at 71 per cent. What happened over that time were two things: we saw one of the greatest migration booms in Australia and we saw interest rates that were about 5.2 per cent. That's very similar to what we have now. Under similar conditions, with a high migration boom to this country and relatively high interest rates, we saw homeownership rates go through the roof. We've done it before, and we can do it again. The key is acknowledging that at the moment there is a massive issue of supply of affordable housing throughout this country. The gridlock is coming through councils and through state governments, and there are certain levers that can be pulled in this place which can actually make a difference. To the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024, which we're discussing today: in my community, the city of Whitehorse is a council that partly covers my area. Councillor Blair Barker had a freedom of information application to note how many residences were unoccupied in that particular council. It was in the many thousands, but there were only 40 properties and owners that were levied the vacancy levy. There's a real issue with enforcement. If we are to have the residential property market be more than just the equivalent of money under the mattress—there's a lot of capital floating around the world, and the Australian residential property market can't be the equivalent of money under the mattress. It is so much more to our economy and to our sense of who we are. With that, I would like to yield to my good friend the member for Kennedy. 16:50 Mr KATTER HX4 Kennedy On the matter of foreign ownership of housing, I feel a great sense of frustration. In Charters Towers we were under a mining act that meant that, if you wanted to do a subdivision, it had to go to the clerk of the mining court, a local person who lived in Charters Towers deputised for the mining magistrate. My wife and I didn't have enough money to complete our house, so we had to do a subdivision. She went in, and he said, 'Fill out that form, Susie.' She filled out the form. It took her about 15 minutes. He said, 'Give me 25 bucks.' She gave him 25 bucks, and he signed it and stamped it. She said, 'When can I sell it?' and he said, 'Now.' If you want to go through that process in Charters Towers now, you're looking at two years, about $50,000, getting an expert environmental opinion, getting an expert anthropological opinion and getting an engineering opinion. When the mining court was abolished in Charters Towers, the price of an undeveloped housing block was $7,000. Within one week under the new regime, it went to $142,000. Now, you don't have to be Albert Einstein, and I am no fan of Malcolm Turnbull, I can assure you, but Malcolm Turnbull and an Oxford don who was an Australian but a professor at Oxford did a report on why housing prices are unattainable in Australia, an empty country. Two hundred kilometres from any city in Australia and you're in empty land. No matter which direction you travel, the land is empty—unless, I suppose, you're on the coast. When I say 'coast,' I'm talking about 50 kilometres of coastline. How can this be? How can an empty land with the cheapest land in the world have housing prices of $820,000 in Brisbane and $1.2 million in Sydney? Well, if you're a Liberal, look no further than your leader Malcolm Turnbull and his report. He simply said it is not a demand problem. Governments keep giving cheap loans, subsidised loans—giving people money—to buy houses. That increases the demand but, of course, it further, relatively, diminishes the supply. The problem is on the supply side. Get rid of all the regulatory impositions and go back to the old mining act in Queensland. You say, 'Oh, you couldn't just let people build a house anywhere they like.' That's what we did in Charters Towers, a town of 16,000 people, a hundred years ago a bigger town than Brisbane. They've been doing it for 100 years there, and I, as the member of parliament there for 50 years, have never had one single complaint about that arrangement—well, for the 20 years while we were governing, until the socialists came in and, of course, went over to the Local Government Act and abolished the magnificent legislation of Red Ted Theodore, the founder of the Labor Party. It's a pity that some of you Labor blokes didn't go back to your roots. We now have a situation where land prices are absolutely colossal. The biggest developer in North Queensland died recently, but I think he'd appreciate me quoting him in the house. Bobby Norman, Sir Robert Norman's son, the founder of the other airline in Australia, said: 'I've sold the 2,000 acres at the back of Cairns because I have not got enough years in my life to complete all the rigmarole that is required of the Australian governments, state, federal and local. I haven't got enough years left to subdivide that 2,000 acres which we desperately needed for housing in the greater Cairns region.' That's a region, I might add, of 300,000 people. It's not like we're small; we're anything but and rapidly growing. The answer is so simple. Surely you can see that, if you put 200 impositions upon a subdivision, you're going to set housing prices through the roof. I'm not going to go into the cost of housing. Similarly, they are applying all sorts of rules and regulations to house building, which adds, I am told by people who know, some $48,000 to the cost of a house. If you put together what government has done to land prices and what government has done to housing prices, we end up where we are. As for foreign takeovers and acquisitions—I mean, if I were a member of the Labor Party, I'd go and hang myself, drown my head in a toilet or something. I withdraw that remark. I'm just trying to find an analogy for the shame that you must feel—and the Liberal Party probably more so. They say that Queensland is about the four Cs: coal, cattle, cane and copper. The copper industry was owned by an Australian company, Mount Isa Mines, proudly created by a wonderful Australian. It's now owned by a foreign corporation. On the coal industry: I'll give you 200 bucks—and I'm a pretty stingy beggar—if you can find an Australian owned coalmining company. Coal is gone. On cattle: the two biggest cattle aggregations in Australia are both foreign corporations: the AA Company and Consolidated Pastoral Company. What the hell are we left owning in Australia? The entire cane industry, which has carried the Australian economy along with wool since the nation's inception, got Australia out of Great Depression. The Labor Party was founded in the cane fields of North Queensland. God bless Red Ted Theodore and the great Theodore Labor movement. I say 'Theodore Labor movement' because it bears no relationship to the Labor Party here today. In fact, I'd say it represents the exact opposite position. They were free marketeers, and we are anything but free marketeers. When it went down, half of us went over to the Country Party and half to the Labor Party. Kevin Rudd's family and my own were classic examples of that phenomenon. They were the same policies and the same party and had the same people in the Country Party! We had a wonderful government for nearly 100 years in Queensland. On the cane industry: every single sugar mill was Australian owned, and all bar three of them were owned by the farmers themselves, the local people. There were 23 mills owned by the people and three mills owned by an Australian company. Now all 23 mills—because that's all that's left—are foreign owned. Who's responsible for that? Who deregulated and destroy that industry? The people in this room destroyed that industry and handed it over to foreign corporations. You abolished the right of the farmers to what the employees call arbitration. The farmers had arbitration. The Theodore family were cane farmers as well as being miners and as well as being workers and employees. They understood arbitration. They fought for it, and they created arbitration in Australia. Not surprisingly, they extended it to the farmers. Farmers all had the protection of arbitration whether it was the wool industry, the cane industry, the grain industry or whatever it was. They had arbitration until it was removed. Let's have a look at their dirty work. Every single sugar mill now is foreign owned. Three have closed down, and the rest are foreign owned. An honourable member: Except Rocky Point. Mr KATTER HX4 Well, we'll leave that up in the air. You and I both know there's a huge question mark there. But I take your point. It's a 'rocky point', but I'll take it anyway. Let me just say that we are now at the mercy of foreign corporations. Every single cane farmer just has to take what the mill feels like paying. Unlike any other industry, we have only 12 hours to get that cane into the mill before it starts losing its sugar content. So we are at the mercy of the mills. Who put us at the mercy of the mills and foreign corporations? People in this House did. People on both sides of this House did. Let's talk about copper. Mount Isa Mines is arguably the second-biggest mining company in the world. Jim Foots bought it off the Americans and turned it into arguably the second-biggest mining company in the world. It's now foreign owned. It's now Glencore. If you want to put the ownership of your country in the hands of foreigners, have a look at Mount Isa. They have a working mine which has copper in it. But, of course, if you're an international commodities trader, you don't want to have all the worry of working a mine. You just want to trade the asset: the copper in the ground. So surprise, surprise! They closed the mine. It puts in jeopardy the whole copper industry in north-west Queensland, which doesn't matter a great deal, because the incoming Labor Party took away the 'use it or lose it' clause in the legislation that the Theodore governments had put there. Now you can be a foreign corporation, own the mining lease and do nothing with it except trade it on the stock market. That's all you have to do. There's no necessity for you to create a job here in Australia. In fact, Glencore has just announced the sacking of 2,000 Australians in Mount Isa. Twelve hundred direct and 800 indirect jobs will vanish. Does the government do anything about it? We carried on, by the traditions of the Country Party in Queensland—the much-maligned Bjelke-Peterson governments—the wonderful Theodore government's policy. We continued on exactly the same policy: you use it or you lose it. As the mines minister in Queensland, the town of Emerald is the size that it is today because I said to the coalmining company, 'You open up your operations to that line, or I am taking it off you and giving it to somebody who will work it.; That is a matter of public record. I got attacked at the time for doing it. The ALP removed the Theodore legislation: use it or lose it. So now our great mining wealth is just a plaything for the stock markets of the world and the share market sharks in Sydney—and I apologise to all sharks for saying that. Can it be worse? There's coal, cattle, cane and copper. We're talking about a few houses being owned by foreigners when you're whole economy is owned by foreigners! They can pay you whatever they like to pay you, and the profits don't go here. I'm a mining man; I'm not a cattleman. I've had cattle all my life, but I'm not a cattleman. I'm a mining man. Minerals have doubled in price. No matter what it is, they've doubled in price over the last 10 years. Boy, oh boy, that's wonderful for Australia. No, it means absolutely nothing to us. We don't own the minerals! The foreign corporations do. In actual fact, our mining wages have been driven down, and I won't say anything about the coalmining leadership. I won't say anything about that; I might get a defamation action. But we have been forced down from 185,000—and I addressed the workers at the workers club at Moranbah, and I said, 'Hey, fellers, we were on 185,000'—and everyone nodded their head—'and now we're on 135,000,' and everyone nodded their head. And I said, 'Well, soon we'll be down, down, down.' Now, this has been in a time period when coal has arguably doubled in price. So coal has doubled in price and the workers have had their wages cut! That will be a good indication of some of the unionism in Australia. I am very proud of my union, the CFMEU, and I want to make the point that the coalminers are not part of the CFMEU. I am very proud of my association with my union and very proud of our performance. If we were in charge in Mount Isa Mines, if we had coverage—and I fought, as a young bloke of 19 years of age, to get coverage for the CFMEU in Mount Isa Mines—then I can assure you that that mine would be reopened. Now, I'm good friends with three people who ran Mount Isa, and they all said that that mine should never be closed. (Time expired) 17:06 Ms COLLINS HWM Franklin I am summing up the debate around the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024. I'd like to begin by thanking all the members who have contributed. We did get some spirited debate on these bills. Certainly the Albanese government has a broad and ambitious housing agenda, to deliver more homes for Australians—more social homes, more homes to rent and more homes to buy. Together, the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024 and the Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024 will implement the measures announced by the government in the 2023-24 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, to triple foreign investment fees for established dwellings and to double vacancy fees, to ensure foreign investment in housing is consistent with the government's agenda to boost Australia's housing supply. Schedule 1 to the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Amendment Bill 2024 will amend the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Act 2015 to increase the maximum fee cap and align indexation across all foreign investment fees. Schedule 2 to the bill will amend the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Fees Imposition Regulations 2020 to triple foreign investment application fees for established dwellings and double vacancy fees for foreign investors who have purchased residential dwellings, new and established, since 9 May 2017. Higher fees will encourage foreign owners to rent out properties, as well as incentivising foreign investment into new dwellings to increase Australia's housing stock. The higher fees for established dwelling applications will encourage foreign buyers to invest in new housing developments. As I said in the second reading speech for these bills, this will create additional housing stock and support economic growth. The increased vacancy fees will encourage foreign investors to make their unoccupied properties available to renters, providing more homes for Australians that need them. Now, the government knows we need to make sure that foreign investors follow the rules. That's why part of our plan, announced in MYEFO late last year, is to give the ATO, the Australian tax office, an additional $3.5 million to up compliance. So we're acting by introducing this legislation, by boosting the Australian tax office enforcement and by encouraging more foreign investment in build-to-rent projects, to make sure that foreign investment supports this government's mission to make more homes available to more Australians. The Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024 will amend the International Tax Agreements Act 1953 to clarify that foreign investment fees and similar state and territory property taxes prevail over Australia's double tax agreements. This will provide certainty that such fees and taxes can continue to be imposed. Together, these bills will support the integrity of the foreign investment rules, with the aim of encouraging foreign persons to purchase new properties to increase Australia's housing stock. The government's housing agenda represents the most significant housing reforms in a generation, after a decade of little action from the former government. With the passage of these measures through the House of Representatives today, we are adding to these reforms to ensure more Australians have a safe, affordable place to call home. I commend these bills to the House. Bill read a second time. Ordered that this bill be reported to the House without amendment. Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024 89

Treasury Laws Amendment (Foreign Investment) Bill 2024

Second Reading 89 Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024 89

Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2023-2024

Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2023-2024

Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 2023-2024

Cognate debate.

Consideration resumed of the motion:

That this bill be now read a second time.

17:12 Mr HILL 86256 Bruce I thought they'd be lining up to speak on this bill, given the wonderful permissiveness of standing order 76, which permits discussion of public affairs. An honourable member interjecting— Mr HILL 86256 Well, you're lining up; I'll give you that. As we're talking about the government's responsible economic management, all of us, when we're here doing our job in the parliament, miss important events in our electorate. In that context, I'd like to acknowledge Serbia's Statehood Day, on 15 February, also known as Sretenje. The day commemorates the outbreak of the first Serbian uprising in 1804, which evolved into the Serbian revolution against Ottoman rule. On the same day, some years later—in 1835—the first modern Serbian constitution, known as the Sretenje constitution, was adopted. This day was declared a holiday by the Serbian parliament in 2001, over 20 years ago, to commemorate that first Serbian uprising. The first modern Serbian constitution emphasised a focus on human rights and bringing Serbia into the modern age. For those who haven't had a chance to visit Serbia, I recommend you do so, particularly the city of Belgrade, which sat for centuries on the literal border of the Ottoman Empire and the then Austro-Hungarian Empire. Statehood Day of Serbia is celebrated over two days, 15 and 16 February, and I'm sorry that I can't be in my community this year for those celebrations. My electorate is home to a vibrant and growing Serbian Australian community. There are over 4,000 people with Serbian ancestry in Bruce, including over a thousand who were actually born in Serbia. Over 3,000 people still speak Serbian at home, as their preferred language, and nearly 3,000 follow the Serbian Orthodox religion, with our wonderfully vibrant church down in Keysborough. There's a special poignancy this year to our celebrations of this cultural heritage because my friend the mayor of the City of Greater Dandenong, Councillor Lana Formoso, is the first mayor of Greater Dandenong who is of Serbian heritage. Lana grew up locally, but the community is incredibly proud. There are over 150 nationalities that call the City of Greater Dandenong home, and the Serbian community is proud to see that one of their own, as they claim, is now leading the city. I saw that firsthand at the 30th anniversary of the Serbian Community Association of Australia some weeks ago. The appropriation bills that are before us implement the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. It is an opportunity to reflect on the government's responsible economic management and historic budget turnaround—the first surplus in 15 years. That was something those opposite promised budget after budget. They had the 'Back in black' cups made, but they never actually delivered a surplus, even before COVID. This appropriation bill shows the government's efforts in cutting rorts and waste. In just 18 months in the life of this government, over $49.6 billion of spending has been identified and cut and reprioritised. The budget bills again show that the government is banking the vast majority of revenue upgrades. So when the government in good economic times with a strong labour market receives more revenue than was anticipated this Labor government is returning 88 per cent of that revenue to the budget, as opposed to the record of those opposite, who were spendthrifts, splashing the cash around, budget after budget, to try and buy a few votes, banking only 40 per cent of the revenue upgrade. It's incredibly important because banking that revenue, cutting rorts and waste and running a surplus budget are exactly what we need right now to put downward pressure on inflation and interest rates. The government is doing its part, alongside the Reserve Bank, to tame inflation. It's not mission accomplished. Inflation is still the central economic challenge confronting the country. It's low- and middle-income earners and those in society who have the very least who get hurt when inflation is out of control in any economy and any country. But there are some encouraging signs. Inflation is coming down. It's heading in the right direction. Real wages are up, and Labor's tax cuts are on the way. All 13.6 million taxpayers will get a cut, not just a select few, which was the policy of those opposite. But it is quite a contrast with the record of those opposite. One of the favourite lies the that Liberal and National parties love to tell is that they are somehow better economic managers. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 176304 The member will retract that reflection on members of the House. Mr HILL 86256 I will retract it but not without qualification. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 176304 No, without qualification. Mr HILL 86256 I will withdraw that and, in doing so, I will also simply note that Practice is very clear: you cannot call members opposite, or any member in this chamber, a liar, but you can reflect when something is a lie made by a party. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 176304 I'm not interested in debating my ruling. Mr HILL 86256 One of the favourite untruths or falsehoods those opposite with delicate sensibilities at times in the Liberal and National parties love to spread is that somehow they are better economic managers. It is complete nonsense. It's brand propaganda and not borne out by the facts. As you would know, Dr Charlton, the two highest-taxing governments in modern Australian history were, No. 1, John Howard's and, No. 2, the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government on the tax-to-GDP ratio. That's an inconvenient fact for the brand propaganda over there. As I said, the first surplus delivered by an Australian government for over 15 years was by this Labor government. It's too early to know where we are going to land this year, but it's entirely possible and plausible that we'll get a second surplus budget in a row, putting the downward pressure on interest rates that Australians want to see. A trillion dollars of Liberal debt they were heading towards, with not enough to show for it. They can't hide behind and blame COVID for this. They doubled the debt even before COVID, another inconvenient fact they don't like to talk about. Real wages went backwards under the Liberal and National parties. On real wages now, we have seen two consecutive quarters of real wages growth, with four per cent in the last quarter, the highest wage growth we have seen for 15 years. These are inconvenient economic facts. The budget appropriation bill before the House ensures that the budget repair which the government is engaged in not is coming at the expense of cost-of-living relief. The budget provides energy bill relief, cheaper medicine, cheaper child care and the biggest single increase in Commonwealth rent assistance in 30 years. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has confirmed that our cost-of-living policies have already reduced inflation by half a percentage point, and Treasury estimates they'll reduce inflation by three-quarters of a percentage point by the June quarter this year. The disciplined approach to spending has made room for additional investments to grow the capacity of the economy and lay stronger foundations for growth in the coming years in energy, housing and skills. We are sometimes a bit unfair on the opposition. We are not allowed them to call them the 'no-alition', but it is a fact that they say no to pretty much any proposition put forward in the parliament, whether it is legislation, a policy proposal or a new idea. But we're a bit unfair when we say that they have no policies because, to be fair, they do have a few policies. They've got one on the books to raise energy prices—opposing Labor's price caps on gas and coal, which would see power prices rise if their policy was implemented. They voted against those caps. They have the policy—which members opposite love to advocate—of nuclear power, which is a distraction. It's like the classic smoke grenade. 'Look over here, we'll say something that's manifestly silly.' Renewable energy is the cheapest form of new power, undeniably. That's what economists say, but they can't agree on that, as we saw on Nemesis last night. The climate wars continued through the decade of division, dysfunction and decay under the former government. They say nuclear power as a distraction from the fact that they had 23 energy policies in nine years and couldn't agree on one of them. They also had a policy to raise taxes on 84 per cent of Australians, and I've got the quotes here. Their brilliant deputy leader, when Labor's tax cuts were announced for all taxpayers, said, 'When the legislation hits the parliament we will fight it all the way. I'm digging in, along with my colleagues and our leader, to fight this really, really hard.' The shadow Treasurer said, 'Of course we're going to try to stop it. A move away from stage 3 tax cuts will not be something we can support.' Senator Matt Canavan said, 'I don't support the government's changed and broken promises on tax.' They're all over the shop. It's hard to know what position they actually hold. They don't want to support Labor's tax cuts for low- and middle-income earners. We'll see what happens when it comes to the vote. But that was their third policy for the term—to raise taxes on 84 per cent of Australians. Then there's their industrial relations policy for workers that we've heard in the last couple of days. These are real genius! They want Australians to work longer and get paid less. That's their policy. The opposition leader said yesterday that he is going to take a policy to the election, a targeted package, which would repeal the legislation passed by the parliament. They've voted against every single measure that the government's put forward over the last 18 months to get wages moving. They've now confirmed that their targeted package is against wage rises and against job security. They're against safer workplaces and against closing the gender pay gap. Even the police union came out today, objecting to the opposition leader's policy of removing the right to disconnect—the law that was passed only yesterday to stop unpaid overtime for workers, through a right to disconnect from unreasonable contact out of work hours. The police union said that this would hurt rank-and-file police and that it was an 'ill-conceived thought bubble'. Those are their four genius policies: raise energy prices, raise energy prices again, raise taxes on 84 per cent of Australians, and cut wages and workplace conditions. But we are discussing public affairs, and anyone who watched the Nemesis program last night or has over the last couple of weeks would still be in shock. They'll be in shock for weeks, months and probably years over the record of the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government. They literally hated each other. The quotes speak for themselves. These are quotes from the television. They're not made-up quotes. They were their own members going on the television talking about each other. To Malcolm Turnbull: 'If I said the name Peter Dutton, what one word springs into your mind?' Malcolm Turnbull: 'Thug.' Senator Reynolds—who's still here; she's still a senator in your party room—said: There were people who overtly supported Peter Dutton and were taking the petition around and people were blackmailed, they were threatened, they were intimidated to sign the petition. It was appalling. We've got Barnaby Joyce, the member for New England, saying, 'I think I definitely lied to him because it wasn't his right to know. How many other people in this building are you asking about their personal life?' That was the relationship between the then Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister: very functional! Christopher Pyne, the former Leader of the House and defence minister said: 'It did surprise me that the plotters had set up in a room next to one of Malcolm Turnbull's chief supporters, which was me.' They could hear bits and pieces from them—'hooting and hollering and laughing and cursing about this person or that person'. Senator Birmingham, who is still your Senate leader—he's not some has-been; he hasn't left. He's your Senate leader, in the top four in your party. He said: Looking back, I can see that the absence of women—other than Julie—in the cabinet at the time, and the commentary around that was a symptom of the problems that were to come to dog us more fundamentally in an electoral sense— which is all, ultimately, they cared about— in years to come, and to this very day. We've got Senator McKenzie, who, I think, is one of the deputy leaders or she's leader of the National Party in the Senate or something. She's still in your frontbench. She said that, while that internal war was going on, 'it was like being strapped to a suicide bomber'; 'something horrific and catastrophic was going to happen'. But I'll bring home the quotes with former member for Bennelong John Alexander, who said: 'In looking at the nine years in power and our three prime ministers, the playing of politics was always the No. 1 game, the No. 2 game and the No. 3 game. It's not productive and it's not edifying.' He was right. They literally hated each other. But the Liberal horror show actually wasn't the worst thing. It wasn't what they said; it was what wasn't said and what wasn't done. I'll close with these three take-outs. There was no focus on policy. There was hour after hour talking about themselves and hating on each other. There was no focus on the Australian people. As John Alexander said, it was all about the playing of politics. The second take-out was that Australia's former top public servant—I've never seen anything like this. I was a senior public servant in Victoria. I'm a fellow of the Institute of Public Administration Australia. I never talk about what happened in Liberal governments that I served and in Labor governments that I served. That ethic stays with you. That the former top public servant in Australia felt compelled to say that the former Prime Minister, the member for Cook, Scott Morrison, never valued women's perspectives was just jaw dropping. That's something that should seriously be reflected on by those opposite. You can see it when you look across their front bench in question time. You're there, Member for Capricornia, and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is there, and there's a sea of men. It says everything. Nothing has changed. The final point is that they're all still here. The only thing worse than the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government is those who are left behind. This isn't a new team. We've got Littleproud, Joyce, Hastie and Pitt over there. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 176304 Order! The speaker will refer to members by their titles. Mr HILL 86256 The biggest moment of horror on their faces, of course, was the prospect of Peter Dutton winning a leadership ballot, and he's now your leader. 17:26 Ms LANDRY 249764 Capricornia I love my electorate of Capricornia and all it has to offer. Since my election as the federal representative, I'm proud to put on record that I have delivered an historical investment of over $6 billion in funding for major infrastructure and key community projects. These projects, delivered under the coalition government, have guaranteed the Central Queensland region continues to flourish and have ensured that Capricornia goes from strength to strength. Every day I work hard to see Capricornia succeed through a diverse economy where mining, agriculture and tourism create wealth for our families and small businesses. Working alongside my community, I have supported our region to be one of the most livable regions in the nation. Some of the best schools in the country, sporting facilities, infrastructure and support networks have made Capricornia the envy of Australia. The seat of Capricornia is best known for being Australia's hub for agriculture. It is internationally renowned for the quality of beef produced. Recognising the potential for further agricultural growth, I fought hard alongside former member for Flynn Mr Ken O'Dowd for the construction of Rookwood Weir. Following several hold-ups from the Queensland Labor government, I was proud to secure a total of $183.6 million of funding through the National Water Grid Fund to deliver this vital project for Central Queensland. Water infrastructure projects such as Rookwood Weir are vital to the growth and diversification of industrial and regional agriculture. Rookwood Weir is the largest weir to be built since World War II. At the peak of its construction, over 300 Central Queenslanders were employed, which has further bolstered the region's economy. Construction for this incredible feat of engineering was completed at the end of 2023. With the recent wet weather across Central Queensland, the weir quickly filled to its full capacity of 86,000 megalitres. This water is now allowing farmers in the region to farm high-yield crops and continue to bolster the local economy. Unfortunately, this Labor government is unable to see the importance of water infrastructure for Australia. In the May 2023 budget, Labor redirected over $872 million from the National Water Grid Fund to prop up other government priorities. Almost $7 billion in crucial dam and water infrastructure projects has now been cut since Labor came to office. Taking away essential infrastructure required to produce food and fibre takes away the next generation's future in the agricultural industry. In Labor's first budget, in 2022, the only water infrastructure project they were willing to invest $32 million towards was the planning of the Pioneer-Burdekin pumped hydro scheme dams. Unlike Rookwood Weir, which will serve to entrench agriculture production and the economic benefits in Central Queensland, or the Urannah Dam, which was able to provide water infrastructure to the agriculture industry, water security for North Queensland and an ability to be used for pumped hydroelectricity production, the Pioneer-Burdekin scheme will only serve one function—renewable energy production. It seems ridiculous to fund a project for only one purpose, that will cost billions of dollars and that will also displace families from their properties on prime agricultural land and flood pristine wilderness. To distribute renewable energy, more than $100 billion will need to be spent on 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines. These poles and wires will run through farming land, national parks and suburbs. Aside from the huge environmental impact of this rollout, every dollar spent will be passed on to Australians in the form of higher electricity bills. This government is lacking foresight in investing in energy solutions that work, such as nuclear energy. Labor's plan to decarbonise the Australian economy isn't working and is causing our country to lag behind other developed nations who utilise nuclear energy to reduce their carbon footprint while keeping their energy supply firm. Next generation, small modular nuclear technologies are safe, are reliable, are cost-effective, can be plugged into existing grids where we have turned off coal, and emit zero emissions. Instead, Labor's plans in their first two budgets have shown they are intent on destroying agricultural land, remnant vegetation and pristine wilderness for out-of-date technologies for energy production. As seen in our electricity bills, investments by this government towards heavy reliance on renewable energy will continue to force power prices higher. Australians' power bills will continue to spiral out of control, with increases by $500 predicted. The cost of groceries is also soaring, with Australians paying eight per cent more to feed their families. Australians are set to see their grocery bill increase even more, with Labor's fresh-food tax set to hit the hip pockets of farmers and consumers. This Labor government is out of touch with regional Australia and the immense contribution the agriculture industry makes to our economy. Capricornia has long been an electorate whose agriculture industry has contributed to the billions of dollars poured into our economy. Unlike those opposite, the coalition government understood that regional Australia is the engine room of the economy, which is why it invested in a number of projects in Capricornia. With beef one of Capricornia's largest commodities, the triannual Beef Week event has put Rockhampton on the map for all things beef. While in government I secured a total of $9.65 million for Beef Week across three events. I was pleased to see the Labor government match our election commitment of $6 million for Beef Week 2024. The coalition understood how important this event is for not just the Rockhampton region but also the entire beef industry, which consists of 7,800 beef cattle farmers and many other beef focused businesses at the forefront of developing and delivering improved farming practices. The event is a key economic driver for Rockhampton and beyond, generating more than $90 million in economic activity for the greater Rockhampton region and a further almost $60 million for Queensland. Beef Week 2021 attracted a crowd of 115,000 people who consumed more than 63 tonnes of beef during the event. As Capricornia is leading the way in the beef industry, I also delivered over $200,000 for CQUniversity to research meat traceability through the National Livestock Identification System. CQUniversity is one of Australia's leading regional universities, delivering higher education courses for the needs of growing industries. One such sector that is continuing to grow, despite Labor's efforts to stifle it, is the mining and resources industry, and I am delighted to see CQUniversity's school of mining officially open. The school of mining and manufacturing was made possible through the coalition government's support and the $30 million of funding I delivered for these projects. These facilities will enable Central Queensland mining and manufacturing industry partners to access a highly skilled workforce within the region which will drive future economic growth. The resources and mining sector is on the precipice of another mining boom, with global needs for minerals and metals beginning to grow with the development of new technologies. The 2021-22 financial report of the Queensland Resources Council said the resources sector employed 1,819 locals in Capricornia and produced $315 million of gross product. However, Labor wants to suppress the industry that secured their one-off $4 billion surplus through implementing their carbon tax and preventing investment in the coal and gas industries. More taxes and lack of investment in the last budget into the resources and agriculture industries is the thanks the sectors received after being the main contributors to the $4 billion surplus. Regional Australians were also big losers in the last budget, with infrastructure investment in the regions at an all-time low under the Labor government. The nation's wealth is produced in the regions, and the coalition saw this and rewarded the hard work of these communities. I was able to secure many road and infrastructure upgrades such as a $25 million Alliance heavy maintenance hangar, $126.4 million for the Rockhampton northern access upgrade, $120 million for the Walkerston bypass and $224.6 million in safety upgrades, road improvements and bridge upgrades on the Peak Downs Highway. After an enormous fight to ensure this government kept his word, the Rockhampton ring road is back on track with full funding back on the table after this Labor government attempted to throw the project on the scrap heap. The Rockhampton ring road is a crucial piece of infrastructure for the region, and without the fight and tenacity of Central Queensland businesses we'd have seen the project put on the backburner indefinitely under this government. Unfortunately, it's not just the Rockhampton ring road which faced the chopping block but also $3.6 billion of upgrades to the Bruce Highway, of which $2.9 billion was federally funded. This stretch of highway remains one of Australia's most dangerous to travel. Last year hundreds of people lost their lives on the Bruce Highway. With Labor's recent announcement of the funding proponent changing from an 80-20 split to a 50-50, more lives will be at risk. It's not all good news, with the Queensland Beef Corridors upgrade and sealing of 457 kilometres put on the backburner. This would have provided an integral part of continuing to deliver high-value commodities that keep the lights on for Australia. My electorate is vast and covers over 90,000 square kilometres. I spend a lot of my time travelling between the many towns, visiting constituents and small businesses. The upgrades that have been to improve safety have literally saved lives, but there is much more that needs to be done. When I visited the small country school of Clarke Creek, one student, no more than 11 years of age, asked me when I would fix the country road he is forced to travel on every day to and from school—a road that was filled with potholes so enormous they covered half of each lane, making it virtually impossible not to hit. Cutting essential regional road programs is a ludicrous decision from this government. They are programs which not only save lives but are nation-building projects. The continuous cuts to infrastructure result in a slowing of our economic growth and hinder what is needed to tackle inflation. Every time a project has its funding deferred and its delivery delayed by Labor, the cost of delivering the project goes up and Australians are left paying higher prices. It's not just essential road projects that have faced the axe under this government. Programs like the Building Better Regions Fund and the regional development program were also cut, with no alternative funding schemes. Regional funding programs are vital for supporting rural and regional Australia through job creation, economic growth and building stronger communities well into the future. Capricornia benefited greatly from regionally focused funding programs to secure important facilities taken for granted by the cities. Projects to benefit from these programs include $1.63 million for a new helicopter hangar for CQ Rescue, $160,000 for Palmyra Dragway's track upgrade, $425,000 for the Collinsville CWA's new hall and over $79,000 for new lighting for the Rockhampton's AFL team's home ground. There is billions of dollars worth of investment in my communities that would improve the liveability of Capricornia. Labor is treating regional Australia with so much disdain that not only are they cutting the vital funding programs for community groups the regions rely on; they have yet to provide any tangible solutions to improving the cost-of-living pressures my constituents face. Finally, I ask: are Australia and my electorate of Capricornia better off today than they were a year ago? Under this government and in only 18 months, the cost of living continues to go up, gas and electricity bills continue to skyrocket, wages are stagnant, inflation remains stubbornly high, unemployment will rise and Australians will pay higher taxes. What Australians need right now is a government that will create policies that will strengthen the economy, not hinder it through taxes; a government that will support the hardworking middle class to prosper, not to create Australia's new working poor; and a government that can recognise the significance of regional Australia and the economy driving industries that contribute greatly to the economy. 17:40 Dr CHARLTON I8M Parramatta Australia is a respected voice on the conflict in the Middle East, even if we are not a central player in the Middle East. The government is using Australia's voice to advocate for the release of hostages, the protection of civilians, humanitarian access and a pathway out of this conflict towards a future of peace and security for all. Foreign Minister Penny Wong has expressed concerns about the Israeli military operation in Rafah: Many of Israel's friends, including Australia, have expressed deep concerns about reports of an Israeli military operation in Rafah. There is growing international consensus: Israel must listen to its friends and it must listen to the international community. There are more than a million civilians sheltering in and around Rafah. Many civilians who were displaced in Israeli operations in the north have moved south to this area, often under Israeli direction. Israel now must exercise special care in relation to these civilians. Not doing so would have devastating consequences for those civilians and cause serious harm to Israel's own interests. Those are the words of our foreign minister, who is doing an outstanding job managing this conflict in the best way possible and ensuring that Australia is a strong voice at the table, promoting peace, stability and sovereignty for all. It is of deep regret that the government does not have partners in this effort in the opposition and the Greens, who are only looking for how they can use this crisis to whip up anger for votes. If they were sincere in their concern about the crisis in the Middle East, they would be engaged on a pathway to peace and keeping our community unified. But they would rather see the community divided, to pick off votes. The Greens should understand that, right now, there are more than 130 hostages still being held by Hamas. And I remind the opposition that we are faced with reports from the UN that 400,000 Palestinians in Gaza are starving, and a million more are at risk of starvation. An estimated 1.7 million people in Gaza are internally displaced, and there are increasingly few safe places for Palestinians to go. Moreover, there is a real risk of regional escalation. The Albanese government is working with partners to manage the risk of regional escalation. But we don't have partners in that effort in this parliament. The opposition and the Greens are not interested in a unified community and a pathway to peace; they're just looking at what's in it for them. Israelis deserve better, Palestinians deserve better and Australians deserve better. 17:43 Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Wright It's always a great pleasure to speak on an appropriation bill because it gives me an opportunity to speak about some amazing things that are happening in my electorate. I want to take the opportunity to acknowledge some of the local government representatives that are going around again. My electorate is made up of four or five different shires, some completely within it and some on the fringe. It starts over on the Gold Coast, bordering up to Robina, and finishes over at Toowoomba—just under 8,000 square kilometres, quite a significant landmass. I will start from the western side and work across. The current mayor of Lockyer Valley is Tanya Milligan, who has done an amazing job and has probably done—I'm probably not doing her justice and not getting the number of years of service correct—around 20 years service in local government. She's full of energy with the way she represents her community with empathy, and the way she is able to somehow extract money—particularly from the federal government when we were in government—is nothing short of magician like. Her deputy mayor is a fellow by the name of Jason Cook, who goes by the nickname of Jughead. This is his first term in council. He's not going to go around again, so I want to acknowledge his contribution. Jughead and I both had a very similar arrival to politics; we were both transport operators. He has a very similar style of directness and lack of empathy for fools. He was an incredible local councillor. To you, Jughead and your darling: when you travel through France, enjoy the wine. Take as long as you need to get over there to flip a few homes. Learn the language. I look forward to both of you returning to the beautiful Lockyer Valley. To each of the other candidates in the Lockyer Valley—I don't believe any others might be standing down, but, if they are, I want to acknowledge their service. In the Scenic Rim we've got a number of personalities standing for Mayor: Tom Sharp and the existing deputy mayor, Jeff McConnell—both incredibly talented man who will be contesting the mayoralty. They are equal in strength and, if successful at the other end of the election process, will serve our community well. I want to acknowledge some of the local councillors in my electorate, in particular a gentleman by the name of Duncan McInnes, probably the oldest counsellor, who was until recently the most significant dairy grower in the region. Duncan has done it tough in the last six months; his wife Mary passed away of cancer. Mary's dying wish was that he contest council elections again. I think she said that he'd crawl up the walls if he didn't have something to do, and council gives him that engagement. He is incredible with his work ethic. To you, Duncan: I wish you every success through the campaign. I note that you have been challenged, and at this stage I'm just unaware who that person is, but it is public knowledge. To the rest of the counsellors who are contesting seats: to step up into higher office at a local government is a great privilege and something I want to acknowledge and encourage because, the greater the diversity of candidates that come forward, the stronger our community is. Over in the Logan City Council, part of my electorate picks up a couple of divisions. One of the divisions there is not being contested by the current holder, Counsellor Laurie Koranski. She is such a ball of energy. I've worked with Laurie for the last 10 years, building a suburb called Yarrabilba. She has been nothing short of an Energizer Bunny; she just goes and goes and goes. She and her husband, who used to be the local dentist, are going to some time to sit back and maybe buy a caravan and travel around Australia. The Mayor of the City of Logan is a fellow by the name of Darren Power. Darren's been 33 years in local government and is not going to go around again. He has made an incredible contribution and commitment to public life. Darren has 10 or 15 years on me but looks like he's 40. He spends time in the gym, his shirts are tight, his biceps bulge. I normally run into him each morning at the gym, actually! You should be pulling me up for misleading the House, Deputy Speaker! To you, Darren, in all seriousness, my friend: your contribution has been steady, steadfast and balanced. Logan has had its bag of headaches, with the administrator being appointed to the council for corruption allegations of previous councils. He weathered that storm, got through it and has put Logan city on a course that he should be able to leave feeling a sense of great pride. The two candidates running for mayor there are a fellow by the name of Jon Raven, who I just sent a text to as I will be unable to attend his campaign launch at short notice, and a former member of this place, the honourable Brett Raguse, a Labor member. Both candidates are Labor candidates, both equally up to the task, and I wish them well. Whoever wins that battle, I look forward to working with them for the betterment of our communities. Over on the Gold Coast is Tom Tate, who hosted the Commonwealth Games. I worked closely with him during the Christmas period, where we had the devastating tornado that went through the Gold Coast, Tamborine and Logan. Tom is a former developer. He brings that commercial common sense to the office of the Mayor of the Gold Coast. He is a no-nonsense guy. He gets to the root of the problem as quickly and effectively as he can. He does have the best interests of Gold Coast residents in mind, and, in particular, the residents who are in the areas of ours that overlap. There is Councillor Glenn Tozer. Most of his division takes in Springbrook, Mudgeeraba and the surrounding areas. He is another guy noteworthy for his incredible work ethic. The community is truly blessed to have someone as energetic and committed to the community. It's a pleasure to work with all of them, and I wish them all the very best and success. With the few moments left available to me, I want to take up some of the points that the member for Bruce made about being better economic managers. It's particularly salient with the appropriation bills that are before us. He came in waxing lyrical that the Liberal Party shouldn't be saying they're the better economic managers. It goes without saying, but I thought I'd just outlay some facts; the realities. Before I got to my feet, I googled 'who do Australians believe the better economic managers are for our country'. The poll that I looked at had 73.4 per cent support for the coalition as better economic managers. The member for Bruce also mentioned that we had left this incredible debt when Labor came to office. He claimed it was nearly $1 trillion. The reason that Labor will never be better economic managers than us is that they can't read the numbers. The debt is still not $1 trillion. When we left, net debt was about $500 billion and gross debt was about $800 billion. Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 Don't let a good story get in the way. I also want to remind all those about the debt situation when we went through COVID. Love him or hate him, former prime minister, the member for Cook, Scott Morrison's legacy will be the contribution he made to our country in steering us through COVID. He and the then Treasurer had tough decisions to make when it was time to wind back the JobSeeker and JobKeeper payments. I remind all that those on the other side, who were in opposition at the time, cried blue murder. They said the economy was going to fall off a cliff. They wanted to continue the spending. They were committed to continuing the spending. We had to fight them tooth and nail to say: 'No, that's enough. We have to start getting people back to work. We've got to get our economy back to some type of normality.' The member for Hinkler is in the room. Do you remember when we had those desperate fights with the then opposition, trying to say to them that enough is enough? Mr Pitt 148150 I try to forget! Mr BUCHHOLZ 230531 I know; it is something that you do want to forget. But I can assure you that, if we weren't the economic managers that we were, the debt would be much higher because those in opposition at that time stated that the economy was going to fall off a cliff. But it didn't; it grew. The economy grew and grew and grew. I'd also like to give a quick shout-out to the former Reserve Bank governor. We're starting to see the economy soften, particularly as inflation follows the global trajectory of coming off its peaks. The only reason that's happening is that he made tough decisions with his back-to-back interest rate rises—I think there were 12 of them. Since the new governor has been in place I don't think we've seen anywhere near that movement. In fact, have we seen any movement at all from the RBA? I think it has flatlined, which is the evidence that suggests that the heavy lifting was done early. No-one will sing his praises. No-one will offer the affirmation that it's an ugly task, as the Reserve Bank governor, to have to make those decisions with the blunt instrument of interest rates, and the only outcome you've got is to get that inflation range back to between two and three per cent. It's always a great pleasure to speak on the appropriations bill, and, with that, I commend my comments to the House. 17:55 Dr WEBSTER 281688 Mallee I rise to speak on behalf of my electorate of Mallee on the bill which has been overshadowed by Labor's destructive industrial relations changes. I was gagged, as were the collective voices of over 10 million Australians, by the Albanese Labor government in a gag-and-guillotine powerplay on industrial relations. These changes, now beyond parliament's control, are part of the package formerly known as 'same job, same pay'. When the employer sector rightly exposed the injustice of the laws, particularly the way people could do less work and get the same pay as hardworking employees, the monicker 'same job, same pay' went out the window, and it became 'closing loopholes'. And yet what we saw this month was a government running through the Senate negotiation minefield, and—look!—instead of closing loopholes, they created a loophole. To close loopholes, they created a new one. It is a loophole that sees employers facing imprisonment or a significant fine for calling a member of their staff after their designated working hours. It feels like a deja vu of the 1970s—power to the unions. Labor has bulldozed the industrial relations landscape, where all you can see is the barren land of union-controlled employment monoculture. Employment diversity and flexibility are gone. A bulldozed landscape isn't as simple as it sounds. Going forward, Labor's latest bill and those before it and perhaps those to come will be like legislative Roundup pesticide—used to kill off the emergence of anything but one kind of employment: permanent, expensive and union represented employment. Labor's IR agenda reverses decades of history, where Australia had moved away from centralised wage fixing towards pay and conditions that were based on productivity and reward for effort. What a great idea. This bill is a victory for the slackers. Labor has reinstated the age of entitlement. In my electorate of Mallee, our farmers and small business owners are the casualties. One farmer in my electorate said, 'The obstacles that could be put in the way of small family farms and businesses by this legislation are nothing short of catastrophic and naive, written by those who have no experience of how small communities are the backbone of the Australian way of life.' That sums up the feeling in my electorate. But there's an overwhelming, overarching feeling, and that is betrayal. It is now impossible to believe anything this government promises, given the Prime Minister and the Treasurer collectively told us 100 times they would stand by the stage 3 tax cuts. Labor's recent backflip is evidence of the lies and untrustworthiness that permeate everything this government touches. Remember this: the policies implemented in the recent industrial relations bill were unexpected and unannounced; they were not included in the government's 2022 election policies. An Albanese Labor government that swore repeatedly that it wasn't going to change stage 3 tax cuts was plotting to also bring in these radical IR changes without a mandate. Can you trust them? Can we trust that this government is done with bulldozing the employment landscape into a jobs monoculture? No, you cannot. We cannot trust that this government is downing tools in industrial relations. I call out the smirking, modest changes claimed by the industrial relations minister. The latest bill and its predecessors have been anything but modest. This bill is regressive, and there's every chance that, if the constellation of crossbench senators align for Labor again, more radical changes could be on the way. Labor's IR agenda will hit my Mallee constituents at a time when Labor has experimented on our farmers. Horticulture is dominant in my electorate, and the labour shortages have been particularly acute for fruit, vegetable and nut harvests. The skills shortage is endemic across agriculture—we are talking tens of thousands of labourers—and it is also acute across regional Australia. Labor robs regional Australia by design to achieve their political goals in the cities. Let's review the 600-plus days of destruction in industrial relations in regional Australia alone. Labor took away piece rates, which paid reward for effort on the basis of how much fruit was picked, and forced farmers to pay workers an hourly wage. Same job, same pay—the lifter and the slacker paid the same with no incentive for productivity or efficiency. We're back in the age of entitlement. Labor binned the ag visa that the Nationals fought for and established when in government. Labor imposed a higher salary for migrants on the temporary skilled migration income threshold, or TSMIT, lifting it from $53,900 minimum salary to $70,000. Labor imposed a 30-hour-a-week pay requirement for workers brought into the country on the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility, or PALM, scheme. On that front, I quote another constituent. A farmer from Cutri Fruit in the north of my electorate said: We currently use the PALM scheme and have consistent problems getting the staff to come to work. Between being hung over, sick, or just not wanting to work, the new laws enforcing minimum hours when the reason for the worker not getting the hours is outside the control of the employer and often in the hands of the employee are just another burden added to the Australian grower. This comes when we compete on a global market in which our labour is significantly more expensive than our competitors. These rules feel even more unjustified when we source the PALM workers from Timor Leste where the average income is around USD $1 per day. That's the scorched earth of regional Australia that is, I repeat, by design under Labor. Labor have bulldozed the employment landscape. Casuals who have worked for six months—or 12 in the case of small business—and have a regular pattern of shifts will be able to convert to a permanent role. The new definition of casual is three pages long. It includes around 12 factors to determine if an employee is actually a casual. Farmwork is seasonal, and casual workers are important for Mallee farmers to have flexibility, particularly during harvest. Indeed, I spoke with Andrew Murdoch on ABC Local Radio earlier today. After I spoke to him, he put to an AWU representative that a local farmer had told Andrew his workers prefer to work as casuals rather than be permanent. Under Labor's changes, a casual worker can convert to permanent when there may not be any work on the property, costing farmers who are getting no income in downtimes and making it impossible to pay them. Employers' right to refuse a casual worker becoming permanent will depend on the Fair Work Commission's interpretation of fair and reasonable operational grounds, tying small and medium-sized businesses in Mallee up in yet more red tape. Are we surprised? Independent contractors will lose their competitive position if a court determines that in a legislatively defined 'reality' they are employees, forcing employers to backpay minimum wages and conditions. As National Farmers Federation president David Jochinke says, farmers are now left to grapple with how they engage employees through labour hire in the context of this new legislation during the busiest time of year. Minister Burke has got his way and will be getting a pat on the back from his union masters, but Mallee farmers will now struggle to get fruit off the tree or vine to feed the nation and the world. It gets worse, far worse. Labor won't stop at bulldozing the employment landscape. They haven't eaten their fill gobbling up regional Australia's hard-earned prosperity for political gains. No, they want to come into the family-farming home as well. They are rolling the red carpet out for the most activist elements of the union movement right into the kitchen of family homes on farms. Labor's IR laws in this parliament have given unions the right to enter farms unannounced, intruding on people's privacy and threatening the personal safety of farmers and their families. Labor's tin ear, their blind obedience to their union masters and their insatiable appetite to rob the regions means they have no care or clue about possible animal welfare implications. I recall when animal activists raided Luv-a-Duck in my electorate. Ducks were stolen from the paddocks and run under the arm to buses and, no doubt, back to Fitzroy and suburbs near there. The owners of Luv-a-Duck were distraught because they knew the ducks would die of fright and shock—so much for protecting animal rights. This new Labor legislation provides unions the right to stomp onto farms and conduct snap inspections of pay records or properties without notice. They don't have a clue about biosecurity. So my question to Minister Burke is: will this Labor government or the unions stump up if union rights of entry lead to an outbreak of a disease, lower food supply and higher food prices? One of the heartbreaking impacts of Labor's IR changes is that Mallee was beautifully positioned to continue a trajectory of growth the coalition had set up for it going into the May 2022 election. We had weathered the worst of the pandemic and survived the needless suffering under the trigger-happy, statewide-lockdown-loving Premier Andrews. The Centre for International Economics predicted the Mildura and Swan Hill regions gross value of production GDP was expected to grow more than anywhere else in the nation to $2.2 billion per annum by 2029-30. Horticulture in the north of the Mallee is underpinned by irrigated horticulture, but Labor is behaving like a wrecking ball to agriculture, reintroducing devastating water buybacks after Victoria and the electorates of Mallee and Nicholls in particular have done most of the heavy lifting in the past buyback rounds and efficiency projects. Labor are taking away our water and now undercutting workforces where we already have dire shortages. Our economy was poised to grow. Now, it will contract under Labor's scorched earth approach to regional Australia. Labor and the Greens are in cahoots to rob the regions to buy votes in the city. When you are next at the check-out trying to put food on the table or in your child's lunchbox, think how expensive Labor is making it for the farmers to produce the food you buy. In the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, these new laws are like putting petrol on a fire. For food delivery and rideshare services alone, Labor's legislation is estimated to see prices increase by up to 35 per cent. I want to come back to the topic of criminal penalties for employers under the so-called right to disconnect. Mallee voters can't wait to disconnect from having a Labor government, frankly. What they are doing in gutting regional Australia is criminal, but I digress. The Greens are the architects of the right-to-disconnect legislation with the criminal sting in the tail. Let me say, Deputy Speaker, through you to the Greens: You don't have a clue. Your inner-city electorates wouldn't have the foggiest idea about regional Australia and, frankly, you don't have a business or economic bone in your green bodies. While the income rolls in from the regions, you spend it on pet projects and ideological posturing on what should or shouldn't happen in the regions. Labor and the Greens are taking the regional golden goose and slaughtering it for short-term political gain. Regional Australia will remember at the ballot box. Regional Australia has had a gutful, and I will be reminding Mallee voters about it every chance I get. Labor want to treat bosses as criminals when in over 95 per cent of cases they are mum and dad small-business owners earning far less then Greens MPs or their senior advisers. They're just trying to earn a living. The writing was on the wall for the business sector and lobby groups, and the coalition tried to warn them. Peak bodies played nice with Labor and bought into the social posturing and distractions. Meanwhile, I assure you, Minister Burke was madly working away with his union mates on this package of bills and nothing else. This is a distracted Albanese Labor government when it comes to the cost of living, but, while Labor was wasting taxpayer money on a half-billion-dollar doomed referendum, Minister Burke and his union mates were hammering out this awful legislation, negotiating with the Senate crossbench and talking to Canberra's Senator Pocock about bike paths to get his vote, all while the peak bodies were having a snooze. To their credit, they got Labor to change the name from 'same job, same pay', but that was a pointless victory. If 'same job, same pay' was a red-hot chilli pepper, Labor just chopped it up and fed it to the business community, twisted through 'closing loophole' noodles. 18:10 Mrs MARINO HWP Forrest Before the election, Labor promised so much to the Australian people. People in my electorate are very much feeling the cost-of-living issues. They know that before the election Labor promised them a $275 reduction in power bills, cheaper mortgages and that families would be better off. But, in just 18 months, food's gone up at least nine per cent, housing's gone up 12 per cent, electricity's gone up 23 per cent and gas has gone up 29 per cent. We've seen the 12 interest rate rises, and we really see that Labor's own economic and energy policies are making inflation worse. Inflation in Australia is higher than in almost every other advanced economy. We've also seen a 27 per cent increase in income taxes for people through bracket creep and the low- and middle-income tax offset being removed by Labor at this time. There's another associated issue: the cost of doing business, particularly for small businesses in rural and regional Australia, including in my electorate and elsewhere in Western Australia. We all know that running a small business, for anyone who's done it, is never easy. But the challenges that are facing small- and family-business operators right now are really weighing heavily on the shoulders of those who live and work in regional and remote areas. In WA, for instance, the policies of both state and federal Labor governments are undermining the confidence and profitability of our small and medium businesses, whose owners work their hearts out day in and day out. They're the people who give people their first job in life and often their last. They're having a go in our small regional communities. We need them so desperately because they support so many of our emergency services groups, our sporting groups and those that are out there needing support and providing in-kind support. That's our small and medium businesses. We know that the RBA has had to do the heavy lifting in relation to inflation. We've seen extreme pressure put on homeowners as well as those small-business owners who often have to mortgage their family home just to get a start. When the pinch is on, as we've seen in the last 18 months with cost of living, consumers tighten their belts, and local businesses are often the first to feel it. When I walk down the street and talk to the businesses in my electorate, that's where I hear what's going on. It's everything from a local cafe serving one coffee at $5 to $7 instead of $3 in a day—that's just a simple example—to the local deli, newsagency, clothing store or pub. The effects of poor policy are felt right throughout our communities. The reality is that much of this pain is coming from Canberra. In WA, Labor's plan to end live sheep exports is really a calculated body blow to WA's sheep industry, to other directly affected sectors and to all the business and communities that benefit from them. It's not just the farmers. It's the local mechanics, shearers, feed suppliers, livestock transporters, local shops and vet practices, just to mention a few. This ridiculous talk of 'transition' is just code for 'we're shutting you down'. These are the same small and family businesses and people who, as I said, support our local community organisations and those sporting clubs. We can't do without the volunteer emergency services groups. They're the volunteers who are helped by our small businesses that provide that support to help keep us alive. It's that simple in regional areas. But right now our communities are reeling from the rollout in WA of the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act. We saw that significantly hurt our farmers on the ground. There's also great concern as to what changes will be ahead in the EPBC Act that may reflect what we saw in the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act in WA. The Labor government has also increased the heavy vehicle road user charge, which, essentially, is a tax on everyone living in regional and remote Australia. This actually has a disproportionate effect on every business input and every food and grocery item in our supermarkets and our local stores, whether they're hardware stores or whatever. Everything that we buy and use arrives on the back of a truck. We've also seen, now, the proposal for additional taxes on family cars and utes. What impact is this going to have in rural and regional areas, from the increase, over time, in the cost of being able to get around in rural and regional areas? Yes, we accept that the distances are great, but the additional costs that will go with this latest thought-bubble of Labor's are going to have a major impact in regional Australia. We also saw Labor, in relation to small and medium businesses, cut the instant asset write-off threshold. This may not mean much to people who aren't in small business, but, for those who are in small to medium businesses, this has really meant a lot. We expanded the threshold to $150,000, and many times I had small to medium businesses contacting me and saying: 'That means I can improve my business; I can actually upgrade'—whether that was the tradie ute, whether it was the livestock transporter and any of their trailers or whether it was any of the work that they needed to do. But Labor has slashed it, limiting it to $20,000 and to businesses with a turnover—not profit; a turnover—of less than $10 million. Many businesses used this. At a time of severely declining productivity, I can't understand why you would choose to make this decision that inhibits small and medium businesses from being able to invest in themselves and their future. It just beggars belief. But we also see something that I think is quite confounding: hitting our small and family farming businesses with its food and fibre tax. That's to pay for the biosecurity risk created by international importers. If they're in my patch, as a dairy farmer, we're actually going to be paying for those competing against us in the market. But I understand it's not only that. We'll actually be helping to fund inspections of non-agricultural imports as well. Whether they're imports of cars or whitegoods or machinery or electronics, the farmers will be helping to pay for those as well. We've seen other really bad decisions. There was the shutdown of the hardwood forestry timber industry in WA and so many of the businesses affected by this. We also now import so much timber from overseas, from locations and countries that basically don't have the really good forestry practices and silviculture that have operated in Australia for so long. So it was short-sighted. And where does our hardwood actually then come from? But this, as we've just heard from the member for Mallee, is the tip of the iceberg for our farmers from the aggressive industrial-relations agenda that we are now seeing. We saw the cultural heritage act in WA. What we're seeing with the unions' rights to come onto farms mirrors, in a sense, what we saw with the cultural heritage act—the unions being able to walk into our family farm where we run our business out of our farmhouse. And, yes, there are biosecurity issues. That's just the start of it. But can you imagine the unions rocking up at your place of work, when you're the actual farmer and the business owner? This is really a step too far. It is absolutely a step too far. It's an aggressive industrial-relations agenda. We see that that is going to impact on small family farms and businesses and is another issue for people who live and work in rural and regional Australia. We've seen real changes, particularly in the Pacific, with the PALM scheme, as has been said in this place, and the increased cost of the temporary skilled migration income threshold. All of these collectively are like that old-fashioned Sara Lee ad: layer upon layer upon layer. If you're a farmer or living in rural and regional Australia—I've been farming a lot over the years, probably a lot longer than many others, and we started our small business on the day we got married. I actually have not seen rural and regional Australia under as much pressure as we are right now. It's just a constant 'What's next, what's next, what's next?' We saw changes to the backpacker working holiday visa. The ag visa is gone. We saw the changes to industrial relations through casualisation and casual workers. Clearly, those who designed this have no idea how a farm, a vegetable grower or a horticulturalist actually works. We actually live by the weather. We work by the weather. What we can do in any given day depends on what's happening with the weather. That means we have to be flexible and so does our workforce. What is so hard about that? I don't know what the problem could possibly be in that space to understand why casual workers are so important. But there is a broader issue that's bothering so many of us: the impact on regional and rural businesses and communities of the 22,000 solar panels needing to be installed every day until 2030, plus the 40 major wind turbines every month as well as the tens of thousands of kilometres of transmission lines to meet their emissions reduction targets. This is in our part of the world. We've got offshore wind coming as well. We have seen prime ag land affected by this, and it's just the beginning. If people think what they're seeing right now—and we've seen some pretty significant results, and rural and regional Australia are really pushing back on this. But there is a lack of understanding in Labor not only about rural and regional but also about the importance of small and family businesses in our rural and regional communities. We understand this really well because that's where we live and that's where we work. For those of us who've had to start and run a business, we know how tough it is, but we keep at it. But you can't keep at it forever and not with a layer upon layer upon layer that we're seeing here. Even right down to superannuation and changes to taxing unrealised gains, I don't think there is any country in the world that does this. The member for Barker, I don't think we know of any other country in the world. No. We're seeing through the safeguard mechanism requirements now that farmers are competing with major companies that have to buy land to put in permanent plantings to actually provide the offsets they need to meet the five by five by five reduction that's required of them in offsets until 2030. All of this adds to the challenges in producing food. One of my local dairy farmers who is under the pump had some vegans arrive at his property and give him great grief. He said to me at one stage, 'You know, Nola, I feed 60,000 people a year.' The farmers in Australia do this day in and day out. We feed Australians some of the best-quality food in the world. And what did he say to me? 'Once or twice it'd be just be nice if someone said, "Thank you."' He's producing some of the best-quality milk in Australia for 60,000 people, and yet the pressure that he's under with all of the measures that I've just talked about is intense. How long will they keep doing this? I wanted to speak up on behalf of all of those small-to-medium family businesses that live and work out in the rural and remote areas. Thank you for what you do and thank you for actually investing in our communities. We can't do it without you. The smaller the community, the more we need you to stay there. I hope that the people in your communities continue to support you so that you support us, because we can't do without each other. I am concerned about your future and I am concerned about rural and regional Australia in a way that I haven't been since we've been farming. 18:24 Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Hunter I would like to say a few things. I heard the last two speakers, and they have been very unhappy about the right to disconnect. The right to disconnect is a big thing that we needed to bring forward, and the Greens have done that with us. It's a fantastic thing that we have brought forward. Why should you be interrupted during a weekend or after hours by your manager, the owner of the business or whoever it is for something that is not needed and that can be spoken about the next day? Why does that need to happen? The right to disconnect is a fantastic thing. They're saying there will be court case after court case. The USU currently has this in their New South Wales EA agreement right now. They haven't had a single court case, and it's been in since July last year. They're also talking about the same job, same pay and the closing labour hire loopholes legislation. This is one of the best things that could happen in the Hunter. I ran my whole campaign in the Hunter on this, around people working in the mining industry getting paid up to $50,000 less for doing the same job. There are two of you guys in here right now. How do you think that's fair? It's not fair. You all know that, just as I do. In the regions where the mineworkers work hard, long hours, it's definitely not fair. Opposition members interjecting— Mr 298840 I love the mining industry. I came from the mining industry. Mr Pasin 240756 There should be more of it on your side! Mr REPACHOLI 298840 We do love the mining industry. While people want to buy our coal, we will always supply them our coal. But let's not forget that the mining industry isn't just coal. The mining industry is critical minerals, gold and so many other things as well. People think the mining industry is only coal. I come from a coal background. As I said, I love coal and, while people want to buy our coal, we will always supply our coal to whoever wants to buy it. Mr Pasin 240756 Uranium? Mr REPACHOLI 298840 We have uranium, too. We have some of the best uranium supplies in the world. We have the best lithium supplies in the world as well. We have critical minerals. There is so much here. The DEPUTY SPEAKER C2T I ask the member for Hunter to pause for a moment. I remind the member for Barker that the member for Hunter has every right to be heard. Mr Pasin 240756 I'm encouraging him! Mr REPACHOLI 298840 I can certainly tell you that, as much as the member for Barker would love me to, I will not be joining the Liberal Party. But thank you very much for the offer. Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Back to it: why should mineworkers be getting paid up to $50,000 less for the exact same job? It's not fair. I fully support this all the way through. I know you guys don't, because not once did you guys speak about workers' rights when we were talking on this subject. Not once did any of you talk about workers' rights. We want bosses to make a dollar and the workers to make a dollar. We want it to be fair all round. That's what we're here for. The Australian Labor Party, led by Anthony Albanese, is doing a fantastic job. I'm so glad that Tony Burke and we as a party got the same job, same pay legislation through— The DEPUTY SPEAKER C2T I remind the member for Hunter that you should be referring to members by their titles. Mr REPACHOLI 298840 Sorry about that. I'll make sure I do that in the future. Thank you for indulging me on that. Once again, we support same job, same pay, and we'll always support it. We will look after workers' rights. We also look after the owners of businesses by making sure we're doing what we're doing. We're giving them energy relief. We're providing so many things to make sure that businesses are staying alive and continuing to employ workers so that we have a thriving economy in Australia. We've just had some of the best times with what we've been working with recently, and we're going to continue that. The mining sector is going strong. We've got so much happening. The tourism sector is still going strong as well. There's a lot of work to do, but we're making sure we do it. The DEPUTY SPEAKER C2T We have a little bit of time before the grievance debate, so the member for Barker has the call. 18:29 Mr PASIN 240756 Barker I just want to congratulate the member for Forrest for her contribution. She effectively was talking about the full-court press, the wholesale assault which is being perpetrated by those opposite on the farmers of Australia. The farmers of Australia are growing their national exports to close to $100 million. The farmers of Australia not only feed every Australian every day but also feed 60,000 to 80,000 people from across the globe. In the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, I would have thought those opposite would spend a little less time prevaricating on ideological wants like the Voice and other things and be more focused on making food cheaper in supermarkets. And the first thing they should be doing is backing Australian farmers, not making it harder for them. In that regard I'll endorse the comments from the member for Forrest. The DEPUTY SPEAKER C2T It being 6.30 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 192B. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The member for Barker will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed at a future date. GRIEVANCE DEBATE 102 GRIEVANCE DEBATE Calare Electorate: Small Business 102 18:30 Mr GEE 261393 Calare Small businesses are the cornerstone of country communities. They operate across every industry and are found in every corner of our nation, from your favourite coffee shop to your terrific local tradie, trusted health professionals and hospitality superstars. While their footprint may sometimes be small, their role and their impact are undeniably vast. There are around 2.6 million businesses in Australia. The vast majority of these, 97 per cent, have fewer than 20 employees. Particularly in the regions, small businesses are an important source of investment and job creation. In fact, just over 30 per cent of small businesses are located outside of greater capital city areas compared with around one-quarter of large businesses. Notably, small businesses in the bush go the extra mile, providing goods and services to areas where larger firms may choose not to operate. While small businesses are the bedrock of the bush, it's undeniably an incredibly challenging time to be a business owner. It's a very concerning time as well. The latest data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics reveals that the number of business exits is at its highest point in five years, and that there is a very modest growth in the number of new small businesses opening up. These numbers point to the harsh economic environment that business owners are facing, and, as I have indicated, it is very concerning. Small-business conditions and confidence have declined over the past year. Business owners are battling high inflation and even higher interest rates. The increase in costs and prices leads to cash flow problems, forcing businesses to decide whether to take the hit and absorb the additional costs themselves or to raise prices and perhaps lose more customers as a result. A report by the Reserve Bank of Australia in September 2023 found that growth in aggregate retail sales values has slowed considerably over the past year, and sales for small retailers have declined. On top of this, the availability of labour has remained tight, which has in many cases constrained operations, including in country areas. In my electorate, extreme weather events such as drought, bushfire, storms and floods which have devastated our region over the past few years have had a shocking impact on many local small businesses. We have to remember it's our businesspeople who take risk and invest funds to build their businesses—often their life savings—borrow money and lie awake at night wondering if someone is going to pay them so they can pay someone else and repay the bank. The government needs to be mindful of the challenges and the very difficult operating circumstances that businesses find themselves in at the moment. Despite these extraordinary challenges, businesses have been pushing forward and achieving great things against the odds. In my electorate of Calare there are many outstanding businesses which are thriving, demonstrating ingenuity, resilience and a commitment to excellence that must be applauded—businesses like the Oriana, in Orange. In 2015, Espen Harbitz and my good friend the late Ted Marr began a huge renovation on the motel, which was built in 1969. In the seventies, the Oriana was the jewel of Orange. More recently, it was looking a little world weary—that is, until Espen and Ted decided to put their heart and soul into turning it into something truly spectacular. With the Oriana reopening in 2018, Espen, Ted and their amazing team did an absolutely stellar job working hard to transform the Oriana into what we now know as 'the Palm Springs of Orange'. Their hard work has paid off, with the Oriana recently taking home gold at the New South Wales Tourism Awards, winning the 4 to 4.5 Star Deluxe Accommodation category— Mr GEE 261393 I take the interjection from my friend from the Hunter. The much loved site now features a unique accommodation space with themed rooms, cocktail bars, a pool club, a martini bar, 250 gardens seats beneath festooned lights and a stunning in-house restaurant called The Peacock Room. The Oriana team has 55 staff members who are passionate about hospitality and strive to create dining, accommodation and tourism experiences to remember. We must also mention Thomas and Kristen Nock, whose Byng Street Boutique Hotel in Orange took silver. The Byng Street hotel in Orange is becoming an icon and a new standard for accommodation in Orange. I'd like to congratulate Thomas and Kristen on that wonderful result, as well. Huge congratulations must also go to Peppertree Collection in Mudgee, which won gold in the Self-Contained Accommodation category at the New South Wales Tourism Awards. The Bathurst Visitor Information Centre also won gold in the category of Visitor Information Services. Owing to their big wins on the state stage, the Oriana in Orange, the Peppertree Collection in Mudgee and the Bathurst Visitor Information Centre will represent New South Wales at the Qantas Australian Tourism Awards to be held in Darwin in March. They had each better pack very light, because I know they'll be bringing back a lot of gold to the Central West. Another Central West business which is also very deserving of recognition is the Black Gold Motel at Wallerawang. The motel recently won the Excellence in Large Business Award at the 2023 Business New South Wales State Business Awards. A massive congratulations to Linda and Bob Cluff and their brilliant team which beat a strong field of businesses from every corner of the state to take home the top gong. Black Gold started out as the old Wallerawang school, built in 1881, and 27 years ago Linda and Bob bought the site and began transforming it to the award-winning Black Gold Motel and the Crib Room Restaurant that everyone knows and loves today. Congratulations to those award winners. I would also like to congratulate Peita and Rob Mages and the team at the Clever Cookie Academy, who took on the top gong at the 2023 Western New South Wales Business Awards Business of the Year. The business also bagged the Excellence in Small Business Award and the Excellence in Innovation Award. Another phenomenal success story in our region is that of Leatherwood Bespoke Rosin. Andrew Baker, Emma Quirk-Baker and their small team were finalists in the Australian Export Awards held in Parliament House in Canberra recently. In the foothills of Mount Canobolas, Leatherwood Bespoke Rosin make resin which is applied to the bows of stringed instruments, such as violins. Congratulations, Andrew and Emma, on this very high achievement. Well done to all of those award winners. Congratulations to them. I know that business owners, like Thomas and Kristen Nock, are very proud of what they have achieved in a very small period of time. At the 2023 Orange Business Awards, there were also many winners, too numerous to mention. The Outstanding Business of the Year went to Diesel & Blue Doggie Daycare and Grooming. The team also took out the Excellence in Innovation Award. There were and many other award winners around the region. At the 2023 Bathurst Carillon Business Awards, for example, the Excellence in Large Business Award went to Harvest Cafe & Store. The Excellence in Micro Business Award went to Oxygen Recruitment & HR, and the Excellence in Small Business Award went to Loveridge Digital. The Bathurst's Favourite Business Award went to Ben's Small Motor Repairs. The 2023 Lithgow Black Rose Excellence in Business Awards, the Excellence in Large Business Award went to Westfund Health Insurance. The Excellence in Small Business Award went to Tablelands Sports & Spinal Physiotherapy, and the Excellence in Micro Business Award went to Pretty Party People. The People's Choice Award went to Lush Hair and Beauty in Portland. I would also, while I have a few minutes remaining, just like to mention some of the other award winners in Orange. Orange's favourite business award went to JH Hair Artistry, run by Jemma Hansen. The excellence in micro business award went to Lumiere Beauty, run by Maggie Morris. The excellence in small business award went to BNB Made Easy, run by Tim Mortimer. The excellence in large business award went to pmwPlus, run by Ray and Dan Miller. It's, as I have said, not easy to be in business at the moment. The operating conditions are very difficult. But, through all of the difficulties and sometimes the pain, there are great things happening in small business. We need to acknowledge that, and also the government needs to acknowledge the great work that the sector is doing. I should also say to everyone out there: support your local businesses and, where you can, shop local. Congratulations to all those businesses whom I have been able to mention in this House tonight. Cost of Living 103 18:40 Ms DOYLE 299962 Aston I rise today to speak on a matter that many in my electorate of Aston have written and called about, an issue that I hear about quite often and something that this government is committed to tackling. Tackling cost-of-living pressures is Labor's No. 1 priority. That's why we are working to cut taxes, boost wages, bring inflation under control and drive fairer prices for Australian consumers. Cost of living is something that we know disproportionately affects low- and middle-income households. I know something about this. I grew up in a low-income household with a family that needed and got support from a government that cared, a government that knew that looking after people is the right thing to do. The Albanese Labor government has invested in fee-free TAFE to get people into careers and reskilling those from other careers to address the skills shortages we are having across Australia after the lack of investment from the previous government. Only a Labor government can be trusted to invest in people through education and training. With 300,000 fee-free TAFE places, access to these programs is even easier for those who are looking to invest in themselves and learn a new skill or trade. In addition to these changes to bring people into work, we supported an increase to the minimum wage to help ensure that Australians who work get a fairer wage. Something was sorely needed following the decade of wage stagnation under the previous government. There was a deliberate policy under those opposite to keep Australia's wages low. Whilst they claim now to be the champions of the working class, they have done everything they can to punish the working class. In fact, our government have supported the increase to the minimum wage twice in the two years we have been in government, compared to the constant push against such wages that those opposite made, where there was no increase. Good government is about knowing and hearing the challenges of the people and responding. That's why we increased funding and investment for vital services that help those that need it and that the statistics show. When economic circumstances change, the right thing to do is change your economic policy. That's what we're doing. We're doing the right thing for the right reasons. The Labor Party is the working-class party. We know what the reality is for many in the community because some of us grew up experiencing the same things. Some of us grew up relying on support services and the good graces of government and social programs. Aston is filled with working-class people. Many constituents are also on various forms of benefits and concessions, like rental assistance. It is an electorate that is built on the back of the working class and is home to many who work in other electorates in a similar vein. All these policies build towards addressing inequality. Our government has also increased rental assistance to help address this particular cost-of-living pressure. It is the largest increase to rental assistance in 30 years, increasing the payments by 15 per cent. I want to reinforce that, at every turn, every struggle that Australians have, this Albanese Labor government has developed measures and policies to help alleviate the mess left by the previous Liberal government. Aston residents have saved $1,511,962 thanks to our policy on cheaper medicine since it was introduced last year. That's money that stays in their pockets, money that they can use to help their families. Only a Labor government will look after Medicare, which is increasingly important after it turned 40 this month. Those opposite made cut after cut to Medicare when in government. Who can forget when their health minister at the time—now their leader—Mr Dutton, tried to introduce a $7 co-payment on visits to GPs? Under our government Medicare will always be prioritised because Labor is the party of Medicare. We created it, and we will always protect and strengthen it. We are reforming and making the largest investments in bulk-billing in the 40-year history of Medicare. Last year Australians saved $250 million on cheaper medicines because of our policies. This year those savings will continue and will grow, with the second and third phases of 60-day prescriptions—all thanks to Labor. In my electorate of Aston, over 93,000 people are receiving an average tax cut of $1,505—a cut worth far more than the original LMITO. But the 'lamington', I hear! Labor is getting rid of the 'lamington'. No, Labor did not get rid of the 'lamington'. The LMITO was only ever temporary. The former Morrison Liberal government, typical in their ways, did not tell the whole story. Even when they conveniently extended a temporary payment prior to an election, they still could not match the cost-of-living relief that this Albanese Labor government delivers. This relief will leave 84 per cent of Australians better off than under what the Liberals proposed. Despite 84 per cent of Australians being better off under this plan, the day before we announced it the Liberal Party made a stand against it. They hadn't even seen the policy when the Deputy Leader of the Opposition announced: 'We will fight this legislation in the parliament. We don't even know what it will look like.' How can a party who, surprisingly, are calling themselves the party for working Australians even consider removing legislation that would benefit them? Is the backpedalling that is going on right now a warm-up for the Olympics? When you claim to advocate for one group and then try your utmost to fight against the interests of said group, are you foolhardy or are you just practising bad policy or trying to pander to other interests? Perhaps those opposite should make sure they know who their friends are. Again, whilst our government is delivering the positive changes Australians voted for and trying to relieve the cost-of-living pressures, the Liberal Party is trying to tear it down and accuse everyone in the ALP of being 'crony capitalists'. Those words are straight from the member for Hume. Crony capitalism—seriously, what decade are we in here? The 1960s, maybe? Typical of the opposition: stuck in the past, criticising everything but never helping. If they were in government, the working people of Australia would spend most of their time on the breadline before realising that it too had been privatised. I would never presume that those across the aisle might know what a union is. In case they need a quick reminder, a union is made up of people from a workplace or industry working collectively to ensure their interests are taken care of, like the Pharmacy Guild or the Farmers Federation. I'm sure those opposite are familiar with them. Casting aspersions on groups that advocate for workers' rights would be problematic at the very least for a party that somehow claims to be acting in the best interests of workers. This is the party that brought in WorkChoices. Wasn't that partly the work of the member for Dickson when he was the Minister for Workforce Participation, gleefully assisting in bringing in WorkChoices? What was former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull's one-word assessment of the member for Dickson? And those opposite have the gall to call proud unionists—people like me—that word. The party for working Australians indeed! Or has he had a change of heart? We'll deliver a tax cut that benefits more Australians, and we're doing it in a way that is fair and responsible. Our government listens. We hear the issues that Australians care about, not some confected outrage that serves only the select few. We care about making Australia a place for all, not for the landed gentry, whom those opposite champion. We stand for a better fairer system, not a system where we must hope and pray for trickle-down economic prosperity for those opposite. Nicholls Electorate 105 18:49 Mr BIRRELL 288713 Nicholls I got elected to this place in May 2022, but I lived in my electorate of Nicholls all my life, so I believe I'm well placed to talk about what had happened previously and what I'm seeing happen now. As former Prime Minister Howard said, 'When you change the government, you change the country.' Indeed, we have seen change, but in my electorate we have not seen change for the better. In my previous life before coming to this place, I worked in agricultural science. I also worked as the CEO of the committee for Greater Shepparton and I spent a lot of time advocating for projects and working with the government of the day. The government of the day for that period was the coalition government, and I found them incredibly good to work with and incredibly receptive. Two things struck me about the previous coalition government. They would roll their sleeves up and do things—not just talk about it but do things and build things—and they didn't have a Canberra-centric approach to life. They would say, 'If you come up with a good idea that you've developed in your region, we'll try to find a way to fund it.' Numerous excellent projects came out of that. What I'm seeing now is that I come to the government with projects and programs that will help my community, and they say, 'You have to go see this minister to see if it fits within this tight bucket.' When I do go to do that, inevitably it doesn't, and these things don't get funded. Let's talk a bit about what I saw before, when we had the 10 years of the previous coalition government, and what I'm seeing now. In terms of infrastructure, the previous coalition government had an excellent record in my electorate and in the surrounding regions. The big-ticket item is the Echuca-Moama bridge. For years, Echuca had had one insufficient bridge crossing the Murray, one of our greatest rivers. Echuca and the town on the other side of the Murray, Moama, are inextricably linked, as are many of the communities that span the New South Wales and Victorian sides of the Murray. In particular, the Nationals in the state and the coalition in government took a really pragmatic approach, saying, 'Let's get this thing funded and let's get it built,' and it was a very proud day for many people—I was just campaigning, so I had advocated for it, but it was the people in government, particularly the then infrastructure minister, Minister Chester, who made sure that the money was found for this project and that the project was built. It was opened, and it has made a huge difference to the lives of the people in Echuca-Moama. That's delivery. It was ironic to see some of my political opponents, whose campaign against me was to say the Nationals have never delivered anything, campaigning on the Echuca-Moama bridge. The irony was stark. The Shepparton ring road was enhanced. That takes a lot of north-south traffic out of the main CBD of Shepparton. That was enhanced under the previous coalition government. The Shepparton Art Museum was built. Sometime we on this side get accused of not being interested in culture. That's not what I found. I found that, if we as a community went to the coalition government—my predecessor was then the member for Nicholls, Mr Drum. If we went to him saying, 'This is what we want as a community,' the Nationals said, 'If it's important to you, it's important to us and we're funding it.' The Shepparton Art Museum got built, and now it's a wonderful part of the cultural life of Shepparton. It brings tourists in and it's home to one of the most significant exhibitions of Namatjira paintings and also one of the most significant ceramics collections in Australia. And $208 million was put toward the Shepparton bypass, which is some money that the previous coalition government put towards a really important project to try to get the Victorian government moving. Since May 2022, when I was fortunate enough to win the election, come up here and make some great friends, including those who I see opposite, the government has funded nothing, built nothing, taken the $208 million away from the Shepparton bypass in the 90-day review—and that's just in my electorate; other programs have been cut—and we just don't see the infrastructure pipeline that we used to see with the previous coalition government. In relation to agriculture, which is such an important industry in my electorate, no-one was 100 per cent happy with the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. It was brought in by the then Gillard government, and the now Leader of the House, Minister Burke, was the water minister at the time. He did come to an understanding around various elements of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. Then, when the coalition government came in, the then minister, Minister Littleproud, worked really constructively with the Victorian Labor government, and other Labor states, to come to an arrangement which gave agricultural investors in my area confidence to say: 'This is what the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is now. There's a huge amount of water that's been taken away from the regions, but it needed to be, for the environment, and, while we don't like it, we accept it, and the extra 450 gigalitres is contingent on a socioeconomic neutrality test—that is, you can't hurt the communities, in terms of society and economy, by taking this water away.' That was well understood, and investment confidence was there. Since May 2022, we've seen Minister Plibersek come in and rip that agreement up and attempt to take more irrigation water away from the communities that I represent. That has been devastating for them, and it will be devastating into the future. Also in relation to industrial relations, the PALM scheme was working well for everyone. Now, I know that there are members opposite—I don't think those members have, but there are other people from over there who have spoken—who see basically every farmer as exploiting everyone, everywhere, which is patently not the truth. The PALM scheme was working well for everyone. It was working well for the people from the Pacific. It was working well for the orchardists. The respect which those two groups of people had for each other was highlighted in a funeral of an orchardist I went to, where the South Pacific workers who had been to that orchardist's farm for 15 years were singing at his funeral. That's the respect that they had for this orchardist. Now the PALM scheme isn't working well for anyone. It doesn't work. If it doesn't work well for farmers, they won't use it. If they don't use it, then the people from the Pacific who've been getting the benefit from it won't get that benefit anymore. So that's been a retrograde step since the election of the Albanese government. And of course there's the cost of living. It was pretty stable previously. Inflation was stable. People were going along pretty well. Interest rates were okay. Energy prices were stable. Everything was sort of going okay. Then the pandemic hit, and some of the courageous decisions that were taken by then Treasurer Frydenberg, around JobKeeper, to try and keep people connected with their businesses, I think saw Australia through that terrible time much better than a lot of other places. So I really commend the previous coalition government on that. I had people contacting me, as the CEO of the Committee for Greater Shepparton, because a lot of the businesses were our members, and saying: 'Can you pass on to Drummie to pass on to Josh Frydenberg that you have saved us. You have saved our businesses and kept us going, because we were thinking that we might have gone out of business.' So that was a great effort, and a great bit of courage by that Treasurer. I know everyone's talking about Nemesis at the moment. What I saw on Nemesis was that Josh Frydenberg said, 'We had to go against some of our principles, but, when it's a crisis, you've got to do that.' And he did. But since the election of the Albanese government, the cost-of-living crisis has been exacerbated, and it has got worse. People are ringing me, as the member, and saying, 'What am I going to do? Inflation's out of control. The interest rates are out of control. Energy prices are out of control. And groceries are going up.' So I ask in this debate: are we, as a country, heading in the right direction with the Albanese government? The people in my electorate are saying, 'Things were better beforehand'—notwithstanding this bragging about an $800 tax cut. We were better off beforehand; we're worse off now, and I hope that gets reflected at the next election. National Disability Insurance Scheme 106 18:59 Ms BYRNES 299145 Cunningham The National Disability Insurance Agency was established by the previous Labor government to deliver the National Disability Insurance Scheme and deliver real change and improvements in the quality of life of Australian people living with a disability. Labor recognises that people with a disability need to be listened to, need to be empowered and need to control their own lives. To help with this, Labor made Australian Paralympic legend Kurt Fearnley AO chairman of the NDIA and appointed five people with a disability to its board. We are committed to rebuilding the NDIS. I have seen daily the impact that this scheme has on people. The numbers speak for themselves. During the 2022-23 financial year, 18,103 cases were referred to the minister's office by parliamentarians to help solve complex problems that were stalled in relevant agencies. When members of the community contact my office regarding issues with the NDIS, they are not simple and quick fixes; they have often exhausted all other options and feel at their wit's end. Over the past 18 months I have been dealing with several of these cases. One of the most heart-wrenching cases I have dealt with relates to the passing of a teenage boy, a NDIS recipient, who lost his life to an aggressive brainstem tumour in 2021. His family have had to endure a horrific battle for bathroom modifications. His family not only had to deal with the trauma of losing a brother, son and grandson; they had to shower at the homes or families and friends, or, even worse, were forced to bathe with a bucket and a garden hose. The bureaucratic dispute with the NDIS began in the midst of the participant's vast decline. Unfortunately, the clunky and slow system let this family down. The family requested approval for the works in a telephone conversation with a local area coordinator, and submitted occupational therapist reports stating the need for immediate modifications. They believe the request was not passed on to the relevant department, as, after waiting several months, with little return contact from following up with the NDIS, the family felt like they had no choice but to remove the bath and shower screen themselves to allow access for bathing while they waited for official approval. Devastatingly, the participant lost his life before the works were able to be completed, and the family were locked out of the participant portal and any avenues of cost recovery immediately. This grieving family was left to clean up the mess which the system created. At the time of passing, just over $23,000 of funding remained in the NDIS plan and the family were seeking $24,000 for the bathroom rectification to fix the bathroom they had desperately ripped apart to keep their loved one at home, and to be able to shower safely. The NDIS was put in place to improve the wellbeing of people with disability and their carers, to reduce the longer-term costs of care, to support people and to be compassionate. But, somehow, this seemed to dissipate during the years of cuts and chaos under those opposite, and we are left with the task of trying to rebuild a compassionate and participant focused culture. The system let my constituent and his family down when they needed help the most over the four short months he was a participant and the long 28 months his family have been trying to reach a resolution. I thank the minister and his staff for meeting with the family in my electorate and doing all they can within the restraints placed upon them. However, the problems within the NDIS need to be resolved to help ensure that this doesn't happen again. Distressed and vulnerable families should not have to fight so hard for basic care and support. To address cases like these, better support people with disability and improve access to the NDIS, Labor employed 380 additional staff. We have already simplified the process for seeking minor, nonstructural modifications under $20,000, making it faster and easier for participants to access home modifications. To reduce unreasonable delay before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, Labor introduced an alternate dispute resolution pilot which resolved 7,000 cases before the tribunal. We also commissioned a far-reaching review of the NDIS. This review travelled to every state and territory, including regional areas, to hear directly from the community. More than 1,000 people with disability and their families were spoken with and listened to, with more than 2,000 personal stories recorded and almost 4,000 submissions received. The final report of this review was published on 7 December last year. Our government took this report to National Cabinet on 6 December last year. At this meeting, the Commonwealth and all states and territories committed to secure the funding of the NDIS. Labor is committed to improving the experience of people with a disability and their families. On 17 December last year, the Minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme announced a crackdown on unfair NDIS pricing. We established a multiagency taskforce comprising the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission and the NDIA. The NDIA was in a mess when we came to government. As a responsible government, we have taken steps to fix this mess and restore the public's faith in this vital institution. It is a big job and our minister is working hard to fix the mess and the culture within the NDIA. I thank him for his care and compassion in doing so. Labor plans to make legislative changes to strengthen the NDIS Act and pursue continuous improvement. One of our first acts on coming to government was to establish the Fraud Fusion Taskforce to increase fraud detection and better safeguard the NDIS from organised crime and other fraudsters. We are committed to stopping fraud within the National Disability Insurance Scheme and we are looking to save millions of dollars to protect the funding that supports people living with a disability. The Fraud Fusion Taskforce investigated $1 billion in NDIS payments in its first year of operation. As of 31 October last year, 43 NDIS fraud cases were under investigation, with 18 prosecutions underway. These prosecutions have led to imprisonments and also the banning of some individuals and organisations from delivering NDIS services. The Labor government is also looking to provide security for NDIS participants to ensure that the provider and worker registrations lead to better outcomes. We have also announced the creation of the NDIS Provider and Worker Registration Taskforce to overhaul the current registration system for the NDIS. One of the key objectives of that taskforce is to ensure that no-one is invisible or forgotten within the NDIS and that participants within the scheme receive a fair go. The recent review of the NDIS called for greater oversight of those responsible for delivering services through the NDIS and we are determined to ensure that this occurs. It's good to remind everyone why the NDIS was established. It was established to provide funding to individuals or organisations to help people with disabilities to participate more fully in economic and social life through the provision of an entitlement enabling things such as aid, support equipment, supported accommodation or personal attendant care to be provided. When Labor was elected, the NDIA was letting participants down and the NDIS was a mess. Labor has employed more staff to reduce processing times and crack down on the rorts and set out to reduce costs and overcharging. Labor have listened to the community and we are determined to deliver a better future for people living with a disability. They deserve it. There have been too many cases in my community where people have been having to fight so hard and for so long to get the services and the support they need. That needs to stop, and we need to rebuild the NDIS. Australian Defence Force 108 19:08 Mr McCORMACK 219646 Riverina Colonel Tim Stone, the commandant of the 1st Recruit Training Battalion at Kapooka, is a good man. I speak to him regularly about military matters. He has one of the most important positions in the Australian Army because every recruit who does their basic training goes through Kapooka. It's an important military institution. Indeed, Colonel Stone is the 37th name on the honour board of names of commandants at Blamey Barracks, and that goes back to November 1951—a long time. Wagga Wagga has a proud military history. Since the 1930s it has had a Royal Australian Air Force at Forest Hill. It has also had a Navy base since the 1990s. The Navy base has upwards of 80 officers there at any given time. We're a long way from seawater, but indeed we have a Navy presence. Wagga Wagga is the only regional inland city with a triservice presence in Australia—Army, Royal Australian Air Force, Royal Australian Navy—and we're proud of that. Our defence people need to be supported every step of the way. I acknowledge the service of the member for Braddon behind me. He is also somebody who has spent time at Blamey Barracks. Blamey Barracks is named after Field Marshall Thomas Blamey. He was a colonel at one stage. He was also a general. He ended up as Australia's only field marshal. He got that just before he passed away. Blamey Barracks is named after him. There's a street in Wagga Wagga named after him. There is even a pub named in his honour—and there should be, too, because, as Australia's highest-ranking military person, he deserves every accolade. But I am concerned that defence is not being supported—and this is the subject of my grievance tonight—by this government as well as it should be. Just last week we learnt that the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Defence, had words with Defence bureaucrats and key military serving personnel about the culture of those in uniform, the culture of what he believes he's not receiving from the military. Many people in uniform are not happy with this. They are rather displeased at the fact that the minister has raised this. Apparently, in a meeting of between 25 to 30 of these high-ranking Defence officials and uniformed personnel, the minister explained why he was unhappy with his department, bringing into focus the performance of the military people underneath him. Our military are the best in the world. I know that the defence minister would acknowledge that, but to lay the blame, as he did in this meeting reported by Andrew Tillett of the Australian Financial Review, and to call into question the department raises more questions than have been answered. When he was quizzed about this in question time, the Deputy Prime Minister went straight to blame, sheeting home the blame to our years in government, which is not fair, is not correct and is not justifiable. He said in his answer: 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. If you call record spending a mess and if you call the fact that we put defence at the forefront of all of our policies a mess—well, I'm afraid that you are mistaken. I know that our defence ministers, each and every one of them, very much appreciated, valued, recognised, acknowledged, praised and supported our people in uniform. Governments of all persuasion should do just that. I don't think this government is paying due recognition and service to our defence people, and certainly not when it comes to making sure that the diplomacy that we should do and the efforts that we should go to in Ukraine and in other places are at the level they should be. Indeed, look at the Taipan and the Bushmaster. Those vital pieces of defence equipment and resource should be provided to Ukraine in its battle against the illegal invasion by Russia. If not, why not? If they don't have the right number of Bushmasters, why is that so? If they can't get the helicopters that they need and there are issues around servicing and their procurement, this is hampering their efforts to repel Russia at a time of world instability. It goes beyond that. In the matter of public importance debate today, the Minister for Defence Industry and minister for the Pacific tabled a letter from Robert Menzies to Stanley Melbourne Bruce in the late 1930s. It was a bizarre tabling. He talked about why we shouldn't have gone into Vietnam and, in doing so, I believe, besmirched the 523 souls, Australians, who lost their lives in that conflict, let alone the 2,400 or thereabouts who were wounded. Never mind the many, many thousands more who came back from that war and were not thanked and recognised until, I will say, Bob Hawke made sure they were, and credit to former prime minister Hawke for doing that. Those men were sent to that conflict in the interests of repelling the rise of communism, and they did so on our behalf. They did so because they were sent there by the government of the day. For a minister to get up and say what he said was very disappointing. We'll all have different views on the Iraq War. We'll all have different views on any war. But our servicepeople go there at our behest and our request—but not just ours. It's on the say-so of the Australian people. National security should be the No. 1 priority. It should always be. At this time in particular our Defence needs to be praised. They shouldn't have to hear from a defence minister that he has issues with 'the culture' at a time when we have our Navy being sonar blasted, and our sailors, moreover, having to deal with that; at a time when the Pacific is a very contested space; and at a time when our soldiers, sailors and air men and women are doing their very best to represent this country, and they do so in an outstanding fashion. And, to that point, the CDF and everybody else who has carriage of leadership of our Army, Navy and Air Force are also doing their best, at the request of this government, to represent our nation on the world stage. If you go anywhere in the world, from Camp Baird to our peace deployments, to the Pacific, to the military bases in Wagga Wagga, my home town, and ask anybody, they will say the Australian service men and women are the best of the best. Our veterans, who will soon march again on Anzac Day, 25 April, are also to be credited and acknowledged for the service and sacrifices that they've made in our name. They honour that tradition—the long line of khaki which stretches from Blamey Barracks in Kapooka all the way to Gallipoli in Turkiye. They honour that tradition. They honour that Anzac spirit. The Anzac torch still burns brightly in their hearts. I think the defence minister needs to explain what actually went on in that meeting and why he said it. Middle East, Myanmar 109 19:18 Ms CHESTERS 249710 Bendigo Over the break I, like many members of this House, received regular emails from constituents concerned about what is happening in the Middle East—concerned about what is happening in Gaza. I also received delegations and people wanting to speak to me about the ongoing crisis and conflict in Myanmar. They're two conflicts that are front and centre for so many in our community, although I do want to note that sometimes Myanmar is talked about less, which it shouldn't be, and I'll explain a bit later why that's a particular grievance of mine. From the outset, I want to say that I acknowledge that the war in the Middle East between Hamas and Israel—what's happening in Palestine and Israel—is hard for many. It is hard for many to watch what is happening. It is clear from our Prime Minister's engagement with the countries and aid organisations in the region that, whilst Australia has never been a central player in the Middle East, our voice is respected. I want to acknowledge the efforts that Prime Minister has made in relation to supporting the region with the aid that is required and trying to be that voice. I want to say something to the people in my electorate who regularly engage: it's important, whilst you might be passionate, upset and alarmed, to be respectful—respectful of others who may have a different view and respectful of people who may work in my office. Just remember that point. Australia doesn't have a central role to play, but we are a voice. We are seen to be an honest, pro-peace country that cares about the humanitarian crisis that is rolling out. I think it's important in this conflict to remember the history, and it is quite similar to Myanmar's in some ways. I guess because of my background I anecdotally say we could just blame the British, which isn't fair, but there is something in that. In 1920, the British assumed responsibility for Palestine under a League of Nations mandate. They had been in Burma for 100 years prior to that. The British gave independence to the Myanmar people in 1948 following the end of the Second World War. At about the same time, they gave up their mandate in Palestine. They kind of left the people in both of those countries to fight it out. History asks us: was that the right thing to do? Here we are 75 years later, and we have two nations which the British were involved in and had ruled, yet they're still at war, and civilians' lives are being lost. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have granted them the opportunity for self-determination and self-governing, but what could we have done better as the West? What could the British have done better when they left? I raise this in a very personal way because my grandfather, at the end of the Second World War, after serving with the British Army in Europe, was sent to Palestine. He never spoke much about his experiences in mainland Europe, but he did speak a lot about what he saw, what he did and what his experiences were in Palestine before Israel was created. Whilst I didn't get to meet him, these are the stories from my mother. I think it's fair to say that it broke him. He was dead less than 15 years later. He and his young family migrated to Australia after he finished his service. He attempted suicide, and then cancer got him a few years later. Those scars remained with him, and his scars were passed on to my mother. So I stand here saying that I grew up in a house where, when it would come up on TV, I constantly heard another side of the story, about just how terribly sad and heartbreaking it was. I think that that's where some of the hopelessness is coming from in the community. This isn't a new conflict. This isn't a shock to the system. It's an old story on repeat, yet we are losing more lives—another generation of young Palestinians, and another generation of grandparents and grandmothers. Innocents are being lost in this conflict. Equally, we can say the same about Myanmar since the coup that occurred there just over three years ago. In Myanmar, over 4,000 people that we know of have been documented to have been killed since the most recent coup, and 25,000 people have been arrested. There have been claims of deliberate blocking of humanitarian aid from reaching millions of people. I have a big Karen community in my electorate who have close connections back to the Karen State. Whilst they somewhat have self-determination at the moment, they are constantly being attacked and bombarded by their own military. What's so heartbreaking about Myanmar is that it was only a few years ago that we were celebrating their transition to democracy. People from this place went to be UN observers in their election vote. Our own AEC worked with their electoral commission to make sure it was free and fair. So to see a democracy collapse so quickly is for many quite heartbreaking, and I know there is lots of concern for the many people left behind. We can't take everybody, but what can we be doing to help advocate for peace in the region? When it comes to the way forward in the Middle East, I do stand with other colleagues calling for a permanent, immediate ceasefire. As demonstrated by our vote in the United Nations, Australia is part of a diplomatic effort supporting an immediate and humanitarian ceasefire. We see that as a crucial step towards a pathway to a permanent ceasefire. Like many ceasefires, though, this cannot be one-sided. We also require Hamas to cease their attacks and to release the hostages. We also stand against the violence by Israeli settlers in parts of Palestine. We have made it very clear that the violence must cease, and the perpetrators must be held accountable. We are a government and a parliament that still believes strongly in a two-state solution. If we think back to that history, 75 years ago, it was always envisioned that there would be two states—a Palestinian state and an Israeli state. We do need to keep talking about that opportunity so that people can have peace and live together. Australia is urging these humanitarian pauses so that we can get assistance in. I do feel deeply for the aid agencies that are trying to do what they can. Thirty thousand civilians are estimated to be lost. The damage that we see on our TVs daily is a reminder of the human toll and cost of this conflict. Whilst in my grievance debate tonight I've raised two conflicts, I know they are not the only two. We still think of the people of Ukraine, and we think of the people of Afghanistan. In all of these conflicts, it's the civilians who lose everything and then are left to try to rebuild. We have a challenge—the UN, the West and free democratic countries that believe in democracy—to continue to promote the idea of democracy and to see that growth within other countries. We do have a challenge, and I just ask the people of my electorate to think longer term. Think about the efforts that we can make to support people today but also about how we are calling for long-term peace in these areas. We do not want the parliament in 75 years time to be standing here saying: "A hundred-and-50 years ago this started, and we still haven't brought about a peaceful solution. We haven't supported peace being achieved—that lasting, enduring peace being achieved in Myanmar and both Palestine and Israel.' I want to thank the people who've reached out to me about this issue, and I want to let them know that I'll continue to listen and continue to engage. The DEPUTY SPEAKER 230886 There being no further grievances, the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will made an order of the day for the next sitting. Federation Chamber adjourn e d at 19:29